i     # 

:  .1 '- 

a 

Division 

1    1 

? 

S£B    ! 

%fe 

it*,  i 

~i 

|l 

8j 

* 


PLEA  FOR  PEACE 


IN    THE 


PRESBYTERIAN  FAMILY, 


OJf  THI  SUBJECT  O? 


PSALMODY 

BY  REV.J.F.'M'LAREN,  D.  D. 


Let  your  moderation  be  known  unto  all  men.  The  Lord  is  at 
hand-Phil,  iy,  5. 

"Controversias,  non  multiplicare,  sed  quantum  fieri  potest,  miniiere, 
rriri  Christiarri  officium  est." — Alph.  Turretin. 

What  can  be  more  irrational,  than  a  disposition  to  defend  pro- 
position, only  because  we  have  had  the  rashness  to  adopt  it.-*:'    .rin. 


PITTSBURGH: 

DATIDS05  &  AGNEW,  MARKET  STREET,  PUBLISHERS 

PRINTED    BY    J.    T.    SHRYOCK, 

1   352. 


TO   THE    READER. 

Western  Theol.  Seminary,  ) 
July  15,  1852.  J 
I  have  had  the  pleasure  of  reading,  in  manuscript, 
the  following  treatise  of  Dr.  M'Laren  on  Psalmody. 
The  clearness,  candor,  aud  comprehensive  brevity,  of 
this  little  work,  must  make  it  popular  with  unpreju- 
diced men.  The  great  point  iii  the  controversy  is  firmly 
seized,  and  distinctly  presented  ;  so  as  to  relieve  the 
reader  of  many  irrelevant  issues,  which  confused  or  de- 
signing men  have  mixed  up  with  the  subject:  and  this 
is  done,  with  a  calm  dignity  and  fairness,  which  I  do 
not  see  how  any  reader  can  fail  to  respect.  Brief  as  it 
is,  it  quotes  historical  facts  not  generally  known,  nor 
hitherto  adduced,  in  the  discussion;  and  which,  if  I 
mistake  not,  must  prove  embarrassing  to  the  advocates 
of  "exclusive  use  &c.;"  and  go  far  to  satisfy  reflecting 
men  that  their  tenet  is  a  novelty.  The  admirable  temper 
with  which  these  pages  are  written,  deserves  to  be  no- 
ticed,  and  cited  as  an  illustration  of  what  christian  po- 
lemics maybe,  and  should  be,  even  on  the  most  exciting 
occasion.  ALEX.  T.  M'GILL. 

As  far  as  I  can  judge  of  the  work  above  referred  to 
by  Dr.  M'Gill,  from  having  heard  portions  of  it  read  in 
manuscript,  I  heartily  concur  in  the  recommendation 
which  he  has  given  it.  D.  ELLIOTT. 


TO      THE 

CHRISTIAN  PEOPLE,  LOVERS  OP  PEACE  IN  THB 
PRESBYTERIAN  AND  ASSOCIATE  REFORMED  CHURCHES, 
THIS  WORK  IS  RESPECTFTJELY  DEDICATED,  BY 

THE    AUTHOR. 


INTRODUCTION. 

To  prevent  the  reader  from  laying  aside 
this  little  book,  as  soon  as  he  discovers  the 
subject,  some  apology,  or  at  least,  some 
explanation  is  deemed  proper.  The  subject 
is  connected  with  the  peculiarities  of  some 
branches  of  the  church,  and  hence  has  as- 
sumed, in  their  esteem,  a  very  prominent 
and  important  position.  Of  course,  it  has 
had  controversy  waged  in  its  behalf;  gallant 
champions,  in  burnished  armor,  have  crowd- 
ed around  it,  every  one  anxious  to  wield  his 
sword  or  to  sling  his  stone.  In  religious 
controversies,  it  not  seldom  happens,  that 
some  persons  get  possessed  with  the  polemic 
contagion,  who  are  distinguished  more  by  the 
violence  of  their  action  and  the  loudness  of 
their  battle-cry,  than  by  the  skill  of  their 
tactics  or  the  brilliancy  of  their  exploits. 
Thus  has  it  been  with  the  subject  of  Psal- 


VI.  INTRODUCTION. 


mody.  And  the  writer  begs  the  reader  not 
to  allow  his  recollection  of  spiritless  and 
wearisome  columns  in  newspapers,  to  prevent 
his  giving  this  little  work  a  fair  perusal.  Its 
author  is  one  of  those  who  believe  that  a 
religious  discussion  may  be  conducted  with- 
out uncharitableness  of  spirit  or  unman- 
nerly rudeness  of  style.  His  book  will  not 
be  found  to  contain  much  of  mere  partyism, 
as  he  does  not  wear  either  the  red  or  the 
white  rose  of  faction  in  his  cap.  He  has 
no  one's  book  or  periodical  before  him,  to 
inflame  his  temper  or  to  sharpen  his  wit. 
He  is  not  even  solicitous  to  show  his  own 
opinion,  so  much  as  to  give  a  just  promi- 
nence to  argument  and  to  point  out  the 
direction  and  result  to  which  it  leads  the 
candid  enquirer. 

These  statements,  it  is  hoped,  will  afford 
a  sufficient  guaranty  to  the  reader,  that  he 
will  not  be  wearied  by  reiterations,  nor 
pained  by  personalities.  And  that  no  great 
amount  of  time  will  be  required  for  the  pe- 
rusal of  this  essay,  its  own  slender  propor- 
tions 'give  the  best  assurance.  The  object 
has  not  been  to  make  a  book ;  but,  as  far  as 


INTRODUCTION.  VII. 

justice  to  the  subject  and  the  design  of  this 
undertaking  would  allow,  to  avoid  making 
one.  Hence,  what  needed  to  be  said  has 
been  compressed  within  the  smallest  intel- 
ligible compass,  and  superfluous  and  irrele- 
vant matter  has  been  resolutely  declined. 

It  is  the  honest  and  earnest  w^ish  of  the 
writer,  to  contribute  his  poor  counsels  to- 
wards terminating  the  strifes  on  this  subject, 
which  have  too  long  disturbed  the  peace  of 
God's  family,  impairing  the  love  of  His 
children,  and  interrupting  their  communion 
with  each  other.  Such  evils  ought  not  to  be 
entailed  upon  the  church  of  Christ  without 
a  clear  and  unavoidable  necessity.  Anc  the 
writer  knows  that  there  are  many  persons 
in  the  contending  churches,  who  deeply 
lament  these  alienations  among  christian 
brethren,  which  the  intemperate  zeal  of  par- 
ty leaders  has  occasioned.  He  is  well  aware 
that  the  ground  of  candor  and  conciliation, 
in  religious  debates,  is  not  the  easiest  ground 
to  hold,  nor  the  most  popular  position ;  yet 
he  can  truly  say,  without  claiming  more 
courage  or  confessing  to  the  charge  of  less 
discretion  than   other   men,  that  he  takes 


VIII.  INTRODUCTION. 

this  ground  by  deliberate  choice.  There 
seems  to  have  been  a  long  enough  continu- 
ance of  this  "strife  of  words"  to  make  the 
office  of  a  conciliator  neither  absurd  nor 
impertinent.  There  seems  a  state  of  things 
to  have  arrived,  when  some  one,  not  intimi- 
dated by  the  common  fate  of  mediators, 
may  kindly  approach  the  combatants,  war- 
ring with  each  other,  instead  of  jointly 
striving  for  the  faith  of  the  gospel,  and 
say  to  them,  "Ye  are  brethren,  why  do  ye 
wrong  one  to  another?"  To  do  this  is  the 
effort  of  the  writer,  in  the  following  essay. 

Some  five  or  six  years  ago,  he  determined 
to  ascertain,  if  it  were  possible,  the  precise 
scripture  doctrine  on  the  subject  of  Psalmo- 
dy. With  a  humble  desire  to  know  the 
truth,  and  a  determination  to  embrace  it 
when  found,  he  searched  for  it  at  the  foun- 
tains, in  the  word  of  God.  And,  now,  in 
view  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Scripture, 
he  believes  that  the  difference  of  sentiment 
and  practice,  between  the  Presbyterian  and 
the  Associate  Reformed  churches,  is  not 
sufficient  to  justify  their  separation  from 
each  other ;  that  the  existing  difference  may 


INTRODUCTION.  IX. 

be  accounted  for  on  the  ground  of  the  in- 
fluence of  early  education,  prolonged  habit 
and  party  feeling,  without  supposing  much 
impulse  of  scripture  argument  on  either  side; 
he  believes  that  brethren  have  been  aliena- 
ted more  by  the  fierceness  of  their  fights 
than  by  the  doctrines  which.occasioned  them, 
and  he  humbly  desires  to  blunt  the  edge  of 
of  party  feeling,  and  to  lead  christian  breth- 
ren to  exercise  mutual  forbearance  and  to 
enjoy  fellowship  with  each  other. 

It  may  be  proper  to  state  that  the  follow- 
ing sheets  were  written  more  than  three 
years  ago,  when  the  author  was  a  minister 
in  the  Associate  Reformed  Church.  Find- 
ing that  much  more  restricted  views  on  the 
subject  of  Psalmody  prevailed  in  this  part, 
than  he  had  been  accustomed  to  in  other 
parts  of  the  Associate  Reformed  Church,  he 
felt  a  natural  desire  to  conform  to  the  views 
of  his  respected  associates.  He  had  every 
inducement  to  do  this,  that  could  be  drawn 
from  his  occupying  a  prominent  post  in  the 
church,  from  his  standing  in  the  estimation 
of  his  brethren,  and  from  those  suggestions 
of  ambition  of  which  few  persons  are  wholly 


INTRODUCTION. 


devoid.  He  thought  that  there  must  be 
some  evidences  or  arguments  for  the  exclu- 
sive use  of  the  old  Psalms,  which  had  es- 
caped his  observation,  but  he  could  not  leap 
to  that  conclusion  without  looking  for  those 
evidences ;  and  he  determined,  if  possible, 
to  find  the  foundation  of  his  brethren's  be- 
lief, that  he  might  build  upon  it  too.  For 
this  purpose  he  searched  the  Scriptures  for 
the  doctrine  of  the  exclusive  use  of  David's 
Psalms,  but  he  found  it  not.  He  often 
talked  with  his  brethren  on  the  subject,  du- 
ring the  progress  of  these  investigations, 
and  was  sometimes  half  disposed  to  be  envi- 
ous of  their  easy  composure  of  mind,  when 
he  found  them,  with  much  less  pains  and 
study,  strong  in  the  belief  that  all  Hymns 
and  Paraphrases  were  an  abomination.  But, 
serious  in  his  desire  to  know  the  truth,  and 
finding  less  evidence  than  he  had  anticipa- 
ted, in  favor  of  the  prevailing  sentiments ; 
popularity  and  intellectual  indolence  and  a 
forced  quiescence  of  faith,  were  deemed  of 
less  value  to  him  than  a  scriptural  belief 
and  a  clear  conscience.     This  is  not  said  as 


INTRODUCTION.  XI. 

a  sarcasm  upon  others,  but  as  a  simple  truth 
in  application  to  himself. 

The  process  and  results  of  this  investiga- 
tion were  committed  to  writing,  with  the 
intention  of  publishing  them  for  the  benefit 
of  the  cause  of  Christ,  which  has  suffered 
much,  though  it  is  hoped  not  irreparably, 
by  angry  debates  on  the  subject;  and  it  was 
particularly  hoped  that  a  candid  treatise, 
coming  from  from  one  of  themselves,  might 
exert  a  pacific  and  profitable  influence  on 
persons  of  both  parties,  who  have  not  ex- 
amined the  subject,  except  at  second  hand, 
and  not  in  the  light  of  Scripture.  For  the 
same  reason,  a  few  items  are  also  added 
from  Church  History,  and  particularly  from 
the  history  of  the  A.  R.   Church. 

Having  been  prepared  while  the  author 
was  in  the  A.  R.  Church,  the  same  style  of 
expression  has  been  retained  that  was  then 
used,  as  the  reader  will  notice  as  he  goes 
along. 


Proper 

•fitC,  MAR  1882 
THEOLOGICAL 


/jt 


CHAPTER  I. 

STATEMENT  OF  THE  QUESTION. 

The  question  in  dispute  between  the  As- 
sociate Reformed  Church  and  the  General 
Assembly  Presbyterians,  is  this — Are  we 
bound,  in  singing  the  praises  of  God,  to 
restrict  ourselves  to  the  use  of  the  Psalms 
of  David?  "When  I  say  that  the  A.  R. 
Church  takes  the  affirmative  of  this  question, 
I  mean  that  this  is  the  position  of  so  many 
of  my  brethren,  that  it  may  be  called  the 
sentiment  of  the  Church,  although  there  is 
no  such  doctrine  taught  in  our  church  stan- 
dards. The  Presbyterians  take  the  nega- 
tive of  this  question. 

Much  controversy  has  been  waged  on  this 
subject,  and  it  has  led  to  much  alienation  of 
feeling,  and  prevented  that  happy  commu- 
nion which  ought  to  exist  between  these  two 
orthodox  bodies.  My  desire  is  to  mediate 
between  them,  and  to  draw  them  together, 
at  least,  in  affection,  in  unity  of  spirit  and 
bonds  of  peace,  by  the  not  too  elastic  liga- 
ments of  mutual  forbearance.  It  will  facil- 
itate this  design,  and  subserve  the  interest* 


14  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

of  truth  and  candor,  to  define  the  question 
more  minutely,  and  to  raise  around  it  some 
landmarks,  to  keep  the  mind  from  wandering 
and  confusion. 

The  brethren  who  take  the  affirmative, 
practically  define  their  position  by  the  fol- 
lowing out-points:  1.  That  it  is  wrong  to 
sing,  in  the  worship  of  God,  a  poetical  com- 
position which,  although  strictly  orthodox, 
is  not  a  fair  translation  of  any  part  of  the 
Scriptur  es.  2.  That  it  is  wrong  to  sing 
a  composition  which  gives  the  sense  of  any 
of  the  Psalms  in  the  form  of  paraphrase 
and  not  of  strict  translation.  3.  That  a 
strict  poetical  translation  of  any  other  por- 
tion of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  besides  the 
Psalms,  must  be  excluded  from  use,  just  the 
same  as  the  forementioned  kinds  of  compo- 
sitions, viz.  Hymns  and  Paraphrases.  4. 
That  to  use  either  of  these  kinds  of  songs 
of  praise,  whether  in  public,  family  or  pri- 
vate worship,  is  a  grievous  corruption,  offen- 
sive to  God. 

Those  who  take  the  negative  of  the  ques- 
tion in  dispute,  particularly  our  Presbyteri- 
an brethren,  illustrate  their  standing  ground 
by  the  statements,  that  it  is  right  to  sing  in 
divine  worship,  1.  Fair  metrical  versions  of 
the  Psalms  of  David.  2.  Paraphrases  of  the 
Bible  Psalms,  which  exhibit  the  sense  there- 
of,   although  it  be  not  in  the  form  of  strict 


ON  PSALMODY.  15 


translation.  3.  Metrical  translations  and 
paraphrases  of  other  parts  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  beside  the  Psalms.  4.  Hymns 
or  poetical  compositions  which  are  sound 
and  scriptural  in  their  matter;  and,  5.  They 
claim  that,  in  doing  so,  they  are  only  wor- 
shipping God  "in  spirit  and  in  truth,"  exer- 
cising the  right  to  judgo  of  hymns  and  par- 
aphrases by  the  standard  of  r  cripture,  as 
they  do  of  all  human  productions. 

This,  it  will  be  admitted  by  both  parties. 
is  a  fair  statement  of  their  respective  views, 
and  brings  the  main  question  clearly  before 
the  reader's  mind:  Are  we  bound  to  sing,  in 
the  worship  of  God,  a  strict  version  or 
translation  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Psalms,  to  the  exclusion  of  everything  else? 

Before  entering  on  an  examination  of  the 
arguments  adduced  on  this  subject,  I  beg  the 
reader's  attention  to  the  following  thoughts. 
It  ought,  surely,  to  soften  the  asperity  of 
party  feeling,  that  the  brethren  on  both 
sides  honor  the  word  of  the  Lord  in  their 
Psalmody:  the  one  class  taking  their  songs 
of  praise  from  a  large  and  precious  portion 
of  the  Scriptures;  the  others  taking  theirs 
from  any  and  every  portion  of  them.  Both 
make  the  Scriptures  the  standard  and  crite- 
rion of  their  Psalmody :  the  one  claims  to 
have  a  scripture,  and  the  other  a  scriptural 
Psalmody.     Their  points  of  agreement  on 


16  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

the  subject  of  praise,  are  more  numerous 
and  important  than  their  points  of  difference. 
Is  it,  then,  irrational  to  indulge,  or  imperti- 
nent to  express  the  hope,  that  by  the  bless- 
ing of  God,  some  of  my  brethren  may  be 
induced  to  feel,  speak  and  act  with  more 
forbearance  towards  those  who  differ  from 
them?  Why  should  the  church  of  Christ 
be  divided  on  a  question  that  comes  fairly 
under  the  head  of  "doubtful  disputations.  "- 
Rom.  xiv,  1.  Why  should  the  friends  of 
Christ  be  distressed  by  this  war  of  words 
and  passions?  Why  should  the  enemies  of 
Christ  have  occasion  of  triumph?  They 
have  never  had  it  in  their  conflicts  with  us : 
0,  let  them  not  have  it,  as  spectators  of  our 
unnecessary  and  ungracious  combats  with 
each  other. 


ON  PSALMODY. 


CHAPTER  II. 

MAIN  ARGUMENT  FOR  THE   EXCLUSIVE  USE 
OF  DAVID'S  PSALMS,  STATED. 

I  now  proceed  to  exhibit  respectfully  my 
views  of  the  subject,  which,  if  correct,  will 
justify  the  claim  for  such  a  degree  of  mutu- 
al forbearance  as  will  restore  and  perpetu- 
ate peace  and  christian  fellowship  between 
the  contending  parties. 

In  a  controversy  of  such  long  standing  and 
in  which  so  many  persons  have  assumed  the 
attitude  of  championship,  we  naturally  ex- 
pect, when  we  take  a  historical  survey,  to 
find  a  considerable  number  and  variety  of 
arguments  on  both  sides;  nor  will  it  sur- 
prise a  candid  and  intelligent  reviewrer  to 
find  Some  that  are  sophistical,  some  that  are 
weak,  some  that  are  irrelevant.  In  my 
reading  on  this  subject,  I  have  met  with  ar- 
guments which  it  is  not  worth  while  to  char- 
acterize, as  I  have  no  intention  of  introdu- 
cing them  and  do  not  wish  to  speak  disre- 
spectfully of  absentees. 

But  there  is  one  argument  which  occupies 
a  commanding  position,  and  is  admitted  on 
A2 


18  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

all  hands  to  have  an  important  bearing  on 
the  question.  It  is  called  the  argument 
from  the  divine  appointment,  or  "divine 
warrant."  I  will  state  it  as  briefly  and 
plainly  as  I  can,  as  follows: 

In  the  Bible  we  have  a  large  number  of 
psalms,  composed  under  the  inspiration  of 
God,  by  different  persons  and  at  different 
times :  these  have  been  sung  in  the  worship 
of  God  by  his  appointment :  they  have,  by 
his  direction,  been  collected  into  a  book, 
and  after  their  collection  have  been  sung  in 
divine  worship.  But  there  is  no  other  col- 
lection, in  the  New  Testament  or  elsewhere, 
that  has  like  evidence  of  divine  appointment; 
and  no  promise  is  given  of  the  aid  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  in  making  other  psalms. 
Therefore  we  have  the  divine  warrant  for 
using  the  Book  of  the  Psalms  in  God's 
praise,  and  the  use  of  any  other  is  unau- 
thorized and  consequently  unacceptable  and 
offensive  to  Him. 

This  is  a  fair  and  full  statement  of  it.  And 
as  it  is,  by  general  claim  and  admission,  the 
strongest  argument  in  favor  of  the  exclusive 
use  of  David's  Psalms,  I  desire  the  reader's 
special  and  patient  attention  to  it,  first,  in 
its  application  to  a  particnlar  version  of  the 
Psalms ;  and  secondly,  to  its  application  to 
the  Psalms  in  any  version  of  them.  If  it 
is  a  sound  argument,  it  is  sufficient  to  estab- 


ON  PSALMODY.  19 

lish  and  maintain  the  doctrine  of  my  breth- 
ren, and  all  others  are  superfluous ;  if  it  is 
unsound,  all  others  are  inadequate,  and  the 
cause  of  the  A.  R.  Church,  so  far  as  Psal- 
mody is  concerned,  is  greatly  weakened,  if 
not  hopelessly  prostrated.  I  propose,  there- 
fore, to  dismiss  all  others  from  the  arena, 
and  to  "fight  neither  with  small  nor  great, 
but  only  with  the  king"  of  arguments;  or 
rather,  as  a  herald,  not  a  combatant  myself, 
I  will  examine  the  quality  of  this  champion 
knight. 


CHAPTER  III. 

MAIN  ARGUMENT  EXAMINED. 

First,  let  us  examine  the  above  main 
argument  in  its  application  to  a  particular 
version  of  the  Psalms  of  David.  We  might 
admit  the  obligation  to  use  the  Bible  Psalms 
alone,  in  the  worship  of  God,  and  yet  con- 
sistently refuse  to  be  confined  to  a  particu- 
lar version  of  them.  If,  desiring  to  use  the 
Bible  Psalms,  a  worshipper  should  ask 
where  are  they  to  be  found,  it  will  not  do  to 
put  Rouse's  version,  for  example,  into  his 
hands  as  the  only  songs  of  praise  that  he 


20  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

caiTproperly  sing.  This  is  only  one  version 
among  many.  It  does  not,  therefore,  hold 
exclusive  claim  to  use,  and  the  above  main 
argument  says  nothing  about  this  or  that 
version.  The  distinction  which  I  am  now 
noticing  is  a  most  important  one,  and  if 
candidly  adhered  to,  in  this  controversy, 
would  narrow  the  grounds  of  dispute  very 
considerably.  But,  unfortunately,  it  is  not 
adhered  to.  The  ground  is  taken  by  the  A. 
R.  brethren,  in  favor  of  the  Bible  Psalms; 
for  the  defence  of  this  ground,  ramparts 
are  raised  and  this  argument,  from  "  divine 
warrant"  is  placed,  like  a  Paixhan  gun,  on 
a  commanding  point,  and  a  banner  is  hung 
out  with  the  alluring  motto,  "An  inspired 
Psalmody,"  and  we  are  loudly  assured  that 
the  contest  is  not  about  a  particular  version. 
But  when  we  look  within  the  circumvalla- 
tions,  we  discover  that  it  is  a  particular 
version  that  our  brethren  are  contending  for. 
This  is  evident,  from  the  single  fact  that, 
while  they  admit  the  existence  of  excellent 
versions  of  Psalms  and  parts  of  Psalms, 
besides  their  own,  they  condemn  the  use  of 
them  as  much  as  they  do  the  use  of  Hymns 
of  human  composition.  Besides,  even  our 
own  Psalm-book  itself  shows  that  the  exclu- 
sive claim  for  a  particular  version  is  not 
founded  in  justice  or  candor,  for  this  book 
contains   two   versions   of    several   of    the 


ON  PSALMODY.  21 


Psalms,  and  it  might  have  contained  five  as 
well  as  two.  So  that  a  person  might  hold 
the  doctrine  of  a  Scripture  Psalmody  and 
conform  his  practice  strictly  to  it,  without 
ever  using  the  version  in  that  book  at  all. 

But  we  are  told  that  this  version  is  the 
best  one.  The  title  page  of  some  editions 
bears  the  commendatory  testimony,  that  this 
versification  is  "more  plain,  smooth,  and 
agreeable  to  the  text  than  any  heretofore. " 
This  was  doubtless  true,  two  hundred  years 
ago,  when  it  was  made ;  but  the  continuance 
of  this  declaration  on  the  title  page  of 
modern  editions,  reminds  me  of  a  sign  that 
I  once  saw — "New  Store:''  the  sign  was 
nearly  illegible,  through  age,  and  the  store 
had  been  discontinued  long  ago.  The  style 
of  language  has  greatly  changed  since  this 
Psalm-book  was  made.  Much  of  the  Eng- 
lish metre  of  that  period  almost  requires 
re-translation,  to  make  it  the  metre  of  the 
present  day.  High  commendation  is  given 
to  this  version,  by  saying  that  it  is  "  as  near 
to  the  original  as  the  laws  of  versification 
will  admit. "  Without  expressing  any  opin- 
ion on  the  the  extent  to  which  the  laws  of 
versification  were  tested  by  the  worthy  Bar- 
onet and  his  venerable  coadjutors  in  making 
this  Psalm-book,  I  may  remark,  that  the 
above  statement  seems  hardly  consistent 
with  the  repeated  efforts  of  the  church  to 


22  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

get  a  better  version.  Again,  altho'  absolute 
perfection  is  not  claimed  for  this  version, 
yet  the  highest  epithets  are  applied  to  it; 
"Inspired  Psalter,"  "God's  Psalm-book," 
&c;  nothing  else  is  ever  sung  in  divine 
worship;  and  the  utmost  alarm  prevails 
when  individuals  or  church  judicatories 
make  any  movement  towards  altering  and 
amending  it. 

Now,  notwithstanding  these  high  and  va- 
ried laudations  of  our  Psalter,  it  is  not  any- 
where in  the  vicinity  of  perfection, as  a  close 
translation:  it  is  paraphrastic  in  innumerable 
cases;  it  is  often  impenetrably  obscure;  it  does 
not  always  give  the  right  sense,  and  in  one  in- 
stane,  at  least,  gives  a  direct  contradiction  to 
the  sacred  word.  But  if  the  version  is  lia- 
ble to  these  exceptions,  it  is  palpably  unjust 
to  restrict  us  to  the  use  of  it  alone;  and, 
since  the  main  argument  which  we  are  con- 
sidering, says  nothing  about  this  version, 
the  restriction  is  as  illogical  as  it  is  unjust. 
To  meet  the  difficulty  that  arises  from  the 
inapplicability  of  the  argument  to  the  case, 
our  brethren  have  tried,  by  hard  labor  and 
loud  acclamations,  to  make  the  case  fit  the 
argument.  This  is  done  by  thrusting  our 
Psalm-book  into  the  place  of  the  Bible 
Psalms,  calling  it  the  "inspired  Psalter," 
"God-given  Psalm-book,"  "the  Psalms  of 
inspiration,"  "the  Bible  Psalms,"  &c. 


ON  PSALMODY.  23 

I  now  invite  the  reader  to  accompany  me 
on  a  short  tour  of  inspection  into  our  an- 
cient and  excellent  version.  And  I  desire 
him  to  go,  with  the  same  spirit  of  candor 
with  which  I  have  myself  gone  into  this 
examination.  Having  set  about  the  inves- 
tigation of  this  subject,  with  a  solemn  con- 
viction of  its  importance  to  the  interests  of 
religion  in  this  part  of  the  country,  I  reso- 
lutely, yet  modestly  I  trust,  determined  to 
turn  over  every  stone,  in  search  for  the 
truth.  And  being  well  aware  that  some 
cherished  sentiments  have  kept  a  place  in 
man's  belief,  by  no  other  tenure  than  that 
of  long  possession,  and  that  there  are  many 
arguments  which,  like  coin,  pass  current,  on 
the  sole  recommendation  of  being  well  worn, 
I  determined  to  examine  the  claim  of  our 
version  of  Psalms  to  the  character  of  a  strict 
translation.  And  I  must  honestly  confess, 
that  I  was  surprised  at  the  amount  of  para- 
phrase and  of  gratuitous  deviation  from  the 
text  that  I  met  with.  Not  to  speak  of  the 
words  added  in  the  way  of  epithets  and  of 
synonymous  words  multiplied  to  complete 
the  lines,  and  of  half  lines  added  to  make 
out  the  verses  and  supply  the  rhyme,  some 
idea  of  the  claim  of  our  version  to  the  char- 
acter of  beinsc  "as  near  to  the  original  as 
the  laws  of  versification  will  admit,"  may 
be  formed  from  the  following  additions,  no- 


24  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

ticed  in  a  couple  of  hours  comparison  of  it 
with  the  prose  translation.  Besides  scores 
of  words  in  the  former,  which  have  nothing 
corresponding  to  them  in  the  latter,  there 
are  many  whole  lines  and  some  entire  coup- 
lets inserted  either  for  explanation  or  mere- 
ly to  fill  out  the  verses.  Here  are  a  few  of 
those  found  in  Psalms  taken  at  random  from 
the  book.   The  added  words  are  those  in  italics. 

He  made  a  pit  and  digged  it  deep, 

Another  there  to  take. — Ps.  vii,   15. 
Upon  a  ten  stringed  instrument, 

Make  ye  sweet  melody. — xxxii,  2. 
O,  for  thy  truth's  sake  cut  them  off, 

And  siceep  then  clean  away — liv,  5. 
The  Lord  my  God  my  helper  is, 

ho,  therefore  I  am  bold. — liv,  4. 
We  surely  shall  be  satisfied 

With  thy  abundant  grace. — lxv,  4. 
They  set  their  mouth  against  the  heavens. 

In  their  blasphemous  talk. — lxxiii,  9. 
Thou  dost  me  hold  by  my  right  hand, 

And  still  upholdest  me — lxxiii,  23. 
My  flesh  and  heart  doth  faint  and  fail, 

But  God  doth  fail  me  never. — lxxiii,  26. 
Still  think  the  same  upon. — lxxiv,  2. 
Their  ensigns  they  set  up  for  signs 

Of  triumph  thee  before. — lxxiv,  4. 
A  man  was  great  and  he  was  had 

In  estimation. — lxxiv,  5. 
O  from  thy  bosom  pluck  it  out 

For  our  deliverance  sake. — lxxiv,  11 


ON    PSALMODY.  25 

Thou  clav'st  the  fountain  and  the  flood 

Which  did  with  streams  abound, 
Thou  dry'dst  the  mighty  waters  up 

TJuto  the  very  ground. — Ixxix,   15. 
How  lovely  is  thy  dwelling  place, 

O  Lord  of  Hosts,  to  me. 
The  tabernacles  of  thy  grace 

How  pleasant,  Lord,  they  be, — lxxxiv,   1. 
And  on  the  harp  of  solemn  sound, 

And  grave  sweet  melody. — xcii.  2 

The  one  hundredth  Psalm,  long  metre  is 
exceedingly  paraphrastic,  from  beginning  to 
end.  A  candid  comparison  will  show  that 
it  i3  not  as  near  the  prose  as  Watt's  100th 
Psalm,  first  part. 

Of  all  his  gracious  benefits 

He  hath  bestowed  on  thee. — ciii,  2. 
The  Lord  almighty  and  his  strength 

With  steadfast  hearts  seek  ye. 
His  blessed  and  his  gracious   face 

Seek  ye  continually. — cv,  4. 
That  I  will  keep  thy  statutes  all 

Firmly  resolved  have  I; 
O  do  not,  then,  most  gracious  Godt 

Forsake  me  utterly. — cxix,  8» 

Indeed,  this  Psalm  furnishes  so  many  ex- 
amples of  the  very  free  paraphrase,  that  I 
will  not  occupy  room  in  reciting  their  con- 
nexion. The  following  will  be  found  inter- 
polated in  this  Psalm. 

In  all  my  doubts  and  fears. — v.  24. 
And  did  my  life  well  try. — v.  59. 
A3 


26  A  PLEA  FOR  TEACE 

As  those  that  slothful  are. — v.  60. 
Through  worldly  ease  aud  wealth. — v.  70. 
I'm  black  and  parched  with  grief. — v.  83. 
My  life  they  scarce  did  leave  — v.  87. 
But  close  to  them  did  cleave. — id. 

I  will  not  multiply  these  illustrations  : 
they  have  been  collected  with  little  effort, 
and  I  leave  out  a  considerable  number  that 
I  had  collected,  lest  the  reader  should  be 
wearied  with  them.  It  will  be  noticed  that. 
in  some  of  the  instances,  there  is  not  mere- 
ly amplification  of  the  thought  or  sentiment, 
but  new  thought  is  inserted.  So  that,  in 
singing  our  Psalms,  we  actually  sing  much 
that  is  not  in  the  Psalms  of  David;  that  is, 
we  sing  " human  composures-''  Why,  then, 
should  we  be  hard  upon  others  who  do  the 
same  thing?  Thou  that  say  est,  a  man 
should  not  sing  paraphrases,  dost  thou  sing 
paraphrases  ?  "  Let  us  not,  therefore,  judge 
one  another  any  more. "-Rom.  xiv,  13. 

I  only  add,  that  the  expressions  in  Ps.  xiv 
and  Ps.  liii,  which  are  the  same  in  the  orig- 
inal and  in  the  prose  translation,  are  varied 
in  the  poetic  version.  The  same  is  true  of 
Ps.  xliii,  11,  and  xliii,  5.  This  fact  show? 
that  the  makers  of  the  metrical  version  not 
only  did  not  deem  it  necessary  to  confine 
themselves  to  a  strict  translation,  but  even 
studied  to  give  a  somewhat  free  and  varied 
paraphrase.     And   it    certainly  shows,  that 


ON    PSALMODY.  27 

they  did  not  entertain  the  notion  which  we, 
in  these  last  days  and  in  these  ends  of  the 
earth,  are  assured  is  the  only  correct  one. 

Although  I  speak  of  this  version  as  not  a 
literal  translation,  yet  I  do  not  maintain 
that  a  literal  translation  is  the  best  one. 
It  is  not  the  best  for  conveying  the  naked 
meaning  of  an  author,  and  it  is  probable 
that  a  too  servile  effort  to  conform  it  to 
the  prose  translation  has  introduced  into 
our  version  much  of  the  obscurity  and  harsh- 
ness which  we  find  in  it.  And  it  may  be 
noticed  that  those  portions  of  the  Psalms 
which  are  freely  translated,  as  in  the  in- 
stances just  cited,  are  more  easy  and  lucid 
than  other  portions  where  the  translation  is 
more  rigidly  verbal.  For  the  statement, 
that  a  strictly  verbal  translation  is  not  the 
best  one,  we  have  the  authority  of  Cowper, 
who  was  an  equally  eminent  translator  of 
poetry  and  original  poet.  "  There  are  mi- 
nutise,"  says  he,  in  every  language  which, 
transferred  into  another,  will  spoil  the  ver- 
sion. Such  extreme  fidelity  is,  in  fact,  un- 
faithful ;  such  close  resemblance  takes  away 
all  likeness.  The  original  is  elegant,  easy, 
natural;  the  copy  is  clumsy,  constrained, 
unnatural.  To  what  is  this  owing  ?  To  the 
adoption  of  terms  not  congenial  to  your 
purpose,  and  of  a  context  such  as  no  man 
writing  an  original  work  would  make  use  of. 


28  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

Homer  is  everything  that  a  poet  should  be ; 
a  translation  of  Homer,  so  made,  will  be 
everything  that  a  translation  of  Homer 
should  not  be,  because  it  will  be  written  in 
no  language  under  heaven ;  it  will  be  Eng- 
lish and  it  will  be  Greek,  and,  therefore,  it 
will  be  neither."  Again;  "Homer  is  eve- 
rywhere remarkable  either  for  ease,  dignity 
■or  energy  of  expression;  for  grandeur  of 
-conception,  and  majestic  flow  of  numbers; 
if  we  copy  him  so  closely  as  to  make  every 
one  of  these  excellent  properties  absolutely 
unattainable,  which  will  certainly  be  the 
effect  of  too  close  a  copy,  instead  of  trans- 
lating, we  murder  him."  [Haley's  Life  of 
Cowper.  Vol.  II,  p.  102.] 

Dr.  Campbell,  in  his  learned  and  ingen- 
uous strictures  on  some  versions  of  the 
Scriptures,  observes  that  a  translator's  work 
requires  strict  attention  to  three  principal 
things;  first,  that  an  author's  sense  and 
meaning  is  fairly  represented,  second,  that 
as  far  as  practicable  and  consistent  with  the 
language  into  which  the  translation  is  made, 
the  author's  spirit  and  manner  be  conveyed 
into  the  version ;  and  third,  that  the  trans- 
lation have  so  much  the  air  of  an  original 
work  as  to  appear  natural  and  easy.  "A 
slavish  attachment  to  the  letter,  in  transla- 
ting, without  any  regard  to  the  meaning,  is 
originally  the  offspring  of  superstition,  not 


ON  PSALMODY.  29 


of  the  church,  but  of  the  synagogue,  -where 
it  would  have  been  more  suitable  in  chris- 
tian interpreters,  the  minister  not  of  the 
letter  but  of  the  spirit,  to  have  allowed  it  to 
remain."  And  of  this  method,  as  to  its 
significancy,  he  says,  "Instead  of  the  sense 
of  the  original,  it  sometimes  gives  downright 
nonsense;  frequently  a  meaning  quite  dif- 
ferent; and  not  seldom  makes  the  aut 
say  in  another  language,  the  reverse  of  what 
he  said  in  his  own."  Again;  "I  shall  only 
add,  that  versions  of  this  kind  are  very  im- 
properly called  translations.  The  French 
have  a  convenient  word,  travesty,  by  which 
they  denote  the  metamorphosis  of  a  serious 
work  into  mere  burlesque,  by  dressing  it  in 
such  language  as  makes  it  ridiculous,  makes 
the  noblest  thoughts  appear  contemptible, 
the  richest  images  beggarly,  and  the  most 
judicious  observations  absurd."  Much  more 
to  the  same  purpose  may  be  seen  in  Dis.  X. 
parts  1  and  2.  A  celebrated  poet  says — 
"Pindar's  high  Lyrics,  if  translated  literal- 
ly, would  become  perfectly  stupid."  [Al- 
fieri. 

It  would,  I  admit,  be  highly  unjust  to  ap- 
ply these  observations  rigidly  to  our  version 
of  the  Psalms.  But  that  they  exhibit  the 
true  theory  of  translation,  as  far  as  they  go, 
no  sound  scholar  will  deny.  And  it  will  be 
denied  by  few,  that  the  strictures  which  they 
A3* 


30  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

include  do  apply,  to  some  extent,  to  our  ver- 
sion of  the  Psalms.  The  sense  of  the  divine 
original  is  often  obscured  by  an  inverted 
and  unnatural  collocation  of  the  words,  not 
suitable  to  the  genius  of  English  poetry; 
and  more  frequently  by  crowding  out  quali- 
fying and  connecting  words,  for  the  sake  of 
contracting  the  expression  into  a  certain 
measure,  and  of  making  the  verses  of  the 
version  in  metre  correspond  numerically 
with  those  of  the  original. 

I  have  now  shown,  I  trust  clearly,  that 
the  main  argument,  from  "divine  warrant," 
does  not  restrict  us  to  the  use  of  a  particu- 
lar version,  say  that  of  Rouse.  But  inas- 
much as  my  brethren,  while  they  admit  this 
in  statement,  do  yet  practically  set  up  a 
claim  for  that  version  to  exclusive  use,  ba- 
sing their  claim  on  its  alleged  superiority,  I 
have  further  shown,  that,  even  as  a  version, 
it  is  far  from  being  correct.  I  do  not  dis- 
parage it.  But  from  what  has  been  said,  it 
is  evidently  not  so  superior  to  ad  others,  as 
to  entitle  it  to  the  reverence  due  to  an  in- 
spired work,  or  to  preclude  the  use  of  every 
other  version,  in  praising  God.  We  ought, 
therefore,  to  be  more  diffident  of  our  own, 
and  more  gentle  towards  the  Presbyterian 
Psalmody. 

With  our  version  of  Psalms  we  have  be- 
come familiar  by  long  usage,  and  we  are  at- 


ON     PSALMODY.  31 

tached  to  it  by  early  and  sweet  religious 
associations.  It  is  to  most  of  our  people 
their  mother  tongue  in  the  utterance  of 
praise.  But  to  others,  who  have  not  had 
this  long  practice,  it  is,  to  some  extent,  still 
in  an  unknown  tongue — an  ancient  if  not  a 
foreign  language.  And  we  ought  not  to  be 
surprised  at  the  embarrassment  which  even 
ministers  of  other  denominations  feel  in 
reading  our  Psalms,  for  they  are  in  a  lan- 
guage which  they  have  not  learned  in  their 
childhood,  and  been  familiar  with,  as  we 
have,  by  their  daily  use  of  it  in  worshipping. 
The  English  metre  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury is  not  the  same  language  as  the  Eng- 
lish metre  of  the  nineteenth. 

It  is,  however,  but  just  to  add,  that  ex- 
pressions of  aversion  and  contempt  for 
these  old  Psalms  are  neither  becoming  nor 
right.  This  style  of  speaking  disparagingly 
of  each  others  Psalmody,  renders  the  pros- 
pect of  reconciliation  less  encouraging,  and 
makes  the  exercise  of  mutual  forbearance 
more  difficult,  although  it  is,  for  that  very 
reason,  the  more  desirable.  It  is  not  come- 
ly or  christian-like,  in  either  party,  to  ridi- 
cule the  Psalmody  of  the  other,  as  long  as, 
in  the  matter  of  it,  it  is  conformable  to  the 
word  of  God.  This  practice  has  led  some 
of  the  Associate  Reformed  people  to  believe 
that  the  Presbyterians  undervalued  the  in- 


A   PLEA  FOR  PEACE 


spired  book  of  Psalms.     And  this  impres- 
sion  lias  been  deepened  and  extended 
some  writers,  I  hope  not  intentionally, 
their  taking  great  pains  to  prove  the  inspi* 
ration  of  the  Book  of  Psalms,  and  to  show 
the    high    estimation  in  which  it  has    heen 
held   by  eminent    christians,    from    Luther 
down;  and  all  this  is  solemnly  addressed  to 
Presbyterians,  for  their  conviction,  as  though 
they  did  not  already  believe  these  thin  — 
firmly  as  we  do  ourselves. 


CHAPTER    IV. 


MAIN  ARGUMENT  FURTHER  EXAMINED 

Let  us  now  approach  a  little  more  closely 
the  position  that  is  defended  by  the  main 
argument.  Having  shown  that  the  argu- 
ment from  i;  divine  warrant "  does  not  re- 
quire us  to  restrict  ourselves,  in  singing  the 
praises  of  God,  to  the  >h  version,  let 

us  now  try  whether  it  Ts  sound  amTcompetent 
to  prove  an  obligation  to  use  exclusively  the 
Bible  Psalms,  in  any  one  version  or  transla- 
tion, however  perfect  it  may  be. 

I  admit  that  the  argument  is  plausible;  I 
doubt  not  that  it  is  honestly  intended  by 
those  who  use  it,  to  honor  God's  word;  I 


ON     PSALMODY.  33 

own  that,  for  years,  it  was  satisfactory  to 
my  own  mind;  and  that  it  is  the  best  the 
case  admits  of.  But  it  appears  to  thousands 
of  intelligent  persons  in  the  church  of  Christ, 
to  be  insufficient  to  prove  an  obligation  to 
use  exclusively  the  Psalms  of  the  Bible  in 
praising  God.  The  parties  who  differ  about 
this  argument,  agree  in  faith,  in  order,  in 
their  estimate  of  the  privilege  and  duty  of 
praising  God,  and  of  doing  it  in  a  right  man- 
ner. The  difference,  while  they  agree  in 
so  many  points,  is  too  small  to  justify  divi- 
sions of  the  church  and  hostility  of  feeling. 
Neither  contemns  the  authority  of  God's 
word,  neither  undervalues  the  exercise  of 
praise ;  but  they  differ  about  the  force  of  an 
argument.  The  Presbyterian  admits  all  the 
facts  included  in  the  main  argument,  for  the 
exclusive  use  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Psalms ;  he  admits  that  they  were  given  by 
inspiration,  nay,  he  contends  for  that  as 
much  as  any  one  does;  he  admits  that  they 
were  given  to  be  sung  by  the  people  of  God ; 
that  they  were  collected  into  a  book  by 
themselves  for  the  use  of  the  church.  And 
he  might  even  admit,  that  they  were  design- 
ed to  be  sung,  to  the  end  of  the  world,  and 
yet  consistently  use  tlymns  and  Paraphrases, 
just  as  he  does,  in  connexion  with  them:  for 
his  opponent  has  done  nothing  towards  prov- 
ing that  the  Psalms   alone  are  to  be  sung. 


34  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

This  is  his  conclusion,  I  know ;  hut  between 
his  premises,  admitted  by  the  friend  of 
Hymns,  and  this  conclusion,  there  is  a  very 
wide  chasm,  that  it  requires  great  logical 
athleticness  to  leap  over. 

The  greatest  stress  is  laid  on  the  fact  of 
the  collection  of  the  Psalms  into  one  book, 
to  prove  the  design  of  God  that  they  alone 
should  be  sung.  There  they  are  in  the  Bi- 
ble by  themselves ;  put  there  by  the  divine 
direction;  therefore,  he  intended  that  they 
and  they  alone  should  be  sung  in  his  wor- 
ship, to  the  end  of  the  world. 

But  let  the  reader  remember  that  they 
were  sung  for  five  hundred  years  before 
they  were  collected  into  a  separate  book,  if 
this  was  done  by  Ezra;  and  it  will  appear, 
that  during  all  that  period,  in  which  the 
Psalms  were  used  in  the  worship  of  God, 
with  a  splendor  and  effect  greater  than  at 
any  subsequent  time,  the  main  proof  of  the 
divine  appointment  would  have  been  utterly 
devoid  of  force.  In  the  days  of  David,  and 
of  Solomon,  and  in  the  period,  even,  when 
king  '-Hezekiah  commanded  the  Levites  to 
sing  praise  unto  the  Lord,  with  the  words 
of  David  and  of  Aseph  the  seer,  (2  Chron. 
xxix,  30,)  and  for  three  hundred  years  af- 
terwards, the  Psalms  were  not  collected  into 
a  book,  in  their  present  form,  and  therefore 
this  part  of  our  brethren's  argument  would, 


o::    PSALMODY. 


35 


during  all  that  time,  be  utterly  invalid.  It 
would  seem  more  judicious,  to  rest  their 
claims  to  use  on  their  inspiration;  but  then, 
that  would  admit  the  use  of  other  inspired 
songs,  as  well;  and  the  whole  argument 
would  be  upset  by  its  own  weight. 

All  that  the  collection  of  the  Psalms  into 
one  book  proves  is,  that  they  were  to  be  pre- 
served as  a  part  of  the  sacred  Scriptures ;  it 
proves  nothing  about  their  being  intended  to 
be  sung.  And  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that 
although  the  Psalms  and  the  Book  of  Psalms 
and  David,  are  again  and  again  mentioned 
in  the  New  Testament,  yet  they  are  referred 
to  in  the  same  way  as  any  other  portion  of 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  and  not  asso- 
ciated with  singing  at  all.  David  is  spoken 
of  as  a  Prophet,  his  Psalms  are  quoted  as 
proofs  and  illustrations  of  doctrine,  they  are 
classified  with  the  Scriptures,  but  are  not 
mentioned  in  connexion  with  singing  in  a 
single  instance,  in  the  New  Testament.  See 
Matt,  xiii,  35;  xxvii,  35;  Luke,  xx,  42; 
xxiv,  44;  Acts,  xiii,  33,  35,  &c.  &c. 

It  might  appear  frivolous,  and  yet  not  be 
more  so  than  the  reasoning  which  it  meets, 
to  say,  that  if  a  supposed  design  of  the 
Psalms  is  to  be  so  narrowly  defined  and  so 
rigidly  adhered  to ;  they  ought  by  no  means 
to  be  read,  because  they  wTere  given  to  be 
sung.     But   there  is   another  reply   which 


36  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

meets  the  allegation,  on  broader  and  more 
important  grounds.  The  reading  of  the 
Scriptures  is  inculcated  as  often  and  expli- 
citly, as  the  singing  of  Psalms  is.  Now, 
if  the  collection  of  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Psalms  into  one  book  is  sufficient  evidence 
that  God  designed  to  restrict  all  our  sing- 
ing of  praise  to  these,  then  the  collection 
into  one  book  of  all  the  inspired  writings, 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation,  is  equal  evi- 
dence that  he  designed  all  our  religious 
reading  to  be  confined  to  this  one  book, 
and  the  reading  of  any  other  is  a  corrup- 
tion of  the  ordinance  of  Scripture  reading, 
just  as  we  are  told,  the  singing  of  Hymns 
is  a  corruption  of  the  ordinance  of  praise* 
Solomon's  Proverbs  were  collected  into  a 
book,  therefore  we  must  never  make  any 
use  of  those  terse  apothegms  which  embody 
the  wisdom  of  other  sages ;  we  must  never 
read  church  history,  lest  we  disparage  the 
records  of  Moses  and  the  Evangelists;  nor 
may  we  utter  a  sorrowing  sentiment  for  the 
church's  declensions  or  disasters,  unless  we 
do  it  in  the  words  of  Jeremiah's  Lamenta- 
tions, which  have  been  collected  into  a  book 
by  themselves. 

This  mode  of  arguing  inferentially,  from 
a  supposed  design  of  the  Head  of  the  church, 
gives  a  little  too  much  room  for  the  play  of 
fancy.     And  that  my  brethren  avail  them- 


ON  PSALMODY.  37 


selves  of  the  space,  in  some  measure,  I 
think  has  already  been  made  to  appear. 
And  I  only  add  further,  that  this  strict  ad- 
herence to  design,  does  not  appear  to  be 
consistently  carried  out  by  my  brethren,  in 
relation  to  other  sacred  books,  for  the  only 
book  in  all  the  Bible  that  stands  under  the 
title  of  a  "Song,"  they  would  no  more 
think  of  singing,  than  they  would  of  sing- 
ing the  book  of  Numbers. 


CHAPTER   V. 

SECOND    PART  OF   THE  MAIN   ARGUMENT 
EXAMINED. 

I  now  come  to  consider  that  part  of  the 
main  argument  which  says  that  the  Psalms 
of  David  were  sung  in  divine  worship  by 
the  church  of  (rod.  This  is  not  denied. 
But  that  they  were  sung  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment church,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others, 
is  the  thing  to  be  proved.  If  I  were  dis- 
posed to  embarrass  those  who  maintain  that 
they  were,  I  would  ask  them  to  show  that 
they  were  sung  at  all  in  the  apostolic  age. 
They  were  used,  they  were  properly  used, 
like  the  other  "Scriptures,"  as  proofs  of 
doctrine ;  but  it  cannot  be  shown,  or  at 
least  it  never  has  been,  that  they  were  sung 
Bl 


38  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

in  the  worship  of  God.  Whether  sinking 
constituted  any  part  of  the  service  observed 
in  the  synagogue  is  not;  certain ;  but  it  is 
plain,  from  several  considerations,  that  in- 
strumental music  could  not  have  been  intro- 
duced into  the  synagogue.  [See  Jennings' 
Jewi  »h  Antiquities,  p.  193,  4.]  And  it  is 
but  a  fair  inference,  that  those  psalms  which 
demand  the  ruse  of  such  music  were  not 
sung  in  the  synagogue  worship.  They  were 
sung  in  the  Temple,  where  a  large  number 
of  persons  were  officially  employed  in  this 
service,  with  the  accompaniment  of  all  the 
various  instruments  mentioned  in  the  Psalms. 
But,  as  the  christian  church  was  formed  af- 
ter the  model  of  the  synagogue  and  not  of 
the  Temple,  we  should  look  to  the  former 
and  not  to  the  latter  for  our  example,  in 
singing  the  praise  of  God.  Dr.  Mason  well 
observes,  on  another  subject,  "  inferences 
should  be  cautiously  drawn  from  institutions 
under  the  law  to  duties  under  the  gospel. 
Error,  here,  has  been  one  of  the  most  fruit- 
ful sources  of  corruption;  and  an  inlet  to 
all  the  rabble  of  the  anti-christian  hierarchy. 

But  there  was  singing,  beyond  a  doubt, 
in  the  primitive  church.  Singing  and  Psalms 
and  Hymns  are  not  unfrequently  mentioned 
in  the  New  Testament.  What  was  sung: 
What  Psalms  did  they  use?  Our  brethren 
reply,  in  a  way  which  suits  their  purpose 


OX  PSALMODY.  39 

much  better  than  it  does  the  claims  of 
scripture  evidence  or  of  logical  reasoning, 
they  sang  the  Psalms  of  David.  How  do 
you  know  that,  brethren?  Why,  say  they, 
the  case  is  clear,  for  they  had  the  Psalms  of 
David  and  they  had  no  others,  there  being 
no  Psalms  or  collection  of  Psalms  in  the 
New  Testament.  Now,  if  a  Presbyterian 
should  say,  that  the  primitive  christians 
sung  Psalms  and  Hymns  that  were  not  in- 
spired, and  that  because  they  were  not  in- 
spired, they  are  not  in  the  New  Testament, 
I  do  not  see  but  that  this  assumption  would 
be  just  as  good,  and  this  inference  just  as 
log:cal  as  the  other. 

But  let  us  look  at  the  matter,  without 
making  either  assumption,  and  see  how  truth 
and  reason  present  the  case;  it  is  of  no  use 
for  reasoners  to  meet  each  other  with  naked 
assertions  and  denials,  they  did,  and  they  did 
not.  Open  the  New  Testament.  We  find 
passages  in  which  singing  and  praising  are 
mentioned  as  the  acts  of  religious  men, 
worshipping  God.  In  some  of  these  in- 
stances, the  words  which  they  used  are  not 
given.  Affirming  or  denying  that  they  used 
the  Psalms  of  David,  on  these  occasions, 
may  be  carried  to  any  extent ;  but  it  proves 
nothing  for  either  side.  They  balance  each 
other,  and  the  summing  up  of  both  is  zero — 
nothing.     But  there  are  other  instances,  in 


40  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

which  the  words  used  in  praising  are  given 
by  the  New  Testament  writers.  These  af- 
ford better  materials  for  argument.  Well, 
when  we  read  these,  we  find,  that  in  point 
of  fact,  they  are  not  the  words  of  David's 
Psalms.  How  will  our  brethren  dispose  of 
this  fact?  They  mus':  admit,  that  in  the 
church  of  Christ,  in  apostolic  times,  the 
Psalms  of  David  were  not  exclusively  used 
in  praising  God,  or,  in  other  words,  that 
the  doctrine  which  they  now  hold,  viz.  that 
it  is  wrong  to  sing  anything  but  the  Psalms 
of  David,  was  not  the  doctrine  of  the  church 
in  apostolic  days.  Whence,  then,  has  their 
doctrine  arisen?  Of  men;  and  of  men  of 
very  recent  times,  as  I  shall  shortly  make 
it  appear. 

But,  to  revert  to  these  cases  :  Of  those 
in  which  the  words  are  not  given,  take  that 
of  Paul  and  Silas,  in  the  prison.-Acts  xvi, 
25.  To  suppose  that  they  sung  in  the  pre- 
cise words  of  a  Psalm  of  David,  is  to  sup- 
pose that  they  were  more  particular  in  their 
midnight  singing,  than  they  or  others  were 
in  their  professed  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures.  Yet,  perhaps  they 
did;  no  one  can  tell. 

In  the  case  of  singing  a  Hymn,  after  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  it  may 
have  been  a  Psalm  of  David,  or  it  may  not. 
There  is  no  way  of  determining  that  ques- 


ON  PSALMODY.  41 

tion.  The  confident  assertion,  made  by 
some,  that  it  was  what  is  callea  the  Hallel. 
or  certain  Psalms  used  by  the  Jews  at  the 
Passover,  rests  only  on  conjecture,  without 
even  traditionary  authority.  Our  divine 
Lord,  in  instituting  the  ordinance  of  the 
Supper,  which  was  to  succeed  that  of  the 
Passover,  accompanied  it  with  several  new, 
significant  actions  and  circumstances,  and 
with  explanatory  words:  and  he  might  also 
have  added  a  new  Hymn  at  its  conclusion. 
Poole  very  plausibly  conjectures  that  the 
discourse  and  Hymn  used  on  this  occasion 
are  the  words  recorded  by  John  in  the  14th 
to  the  17th  chapters  of  his  gospel.  [See 
Synopsis  Criticorum,  on  Matt,  xxvi,  30.] — 
The  conjecture  is  certainly  as  good  as  that 
the  Hymn  used  was  the  113th  to  the  118th 
Psalm,  ^ay,  it  is  much  better,  for  the  con- 
nexion of  events,  the  order  of  narrative,  in 
John,  and  the  strain  of  the  thoughts  are  such 
as  decidedly  to  favor  the  hypothesis.  It  is 
rendered,  too,  quite  probable,  by  the  admit- 
ted fact,  that  the  apostle  John  records  prin- 
cipally such  details  of  Christ's  acts  and 
sayings,  as  were  omitted  by  the  other  gos- 
pel historians.  It  seems  to  me,  to  present 
that  interesting  scene  in  a  beautiful  light. 
Behold  the  blessed  Jesus,  during  the  obser- 
vance of  this  first  sacramental  supper,  com- 
forting his    disciples,    who   were    sorrowful 


42  A   PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

and  depressed  by  his  declaration  that  he 
was  going  away  from  them:  "Let  not  your 
hearts  be  troubled,"  he  says,  "I  go  to  pre- 
pare a  place  for  you;"  " I  will  not  leave 
you  comfortless,  I  will  come  to  you;"  '"these 
things  I  said  not  unto  you  at  the  beginning, 
because  I  was  with  you,  but  now  I  go  to  him 
that  sent  me;"  and  then,  having  so  fully 
and  affectionately  discoursed  with  his  disci- 
ples, he  turns  and  addresses  to  his  father 
in  heaven  the  sublime  and  appropriate  Hymn 
contained  in  the  17th  chapter:  having  spo- 
ken these  words  to  them,  he  ;;  lifted  his  eyes 
to  heaven  and  said.  Father,  the  hour  is 
come;  glorify  thy  son." 

This  wonderful  strain  of  discourse  began 
at  the  table ;  (John,  loth  chap.)  and  wherj. 
it  was  ended,  "he  went  forth  with  his  disci- 
ples over  the  brook  Cedron  where  was  a 
garden"— Gethsemane.-xviii.  1.  The  subject, 
the  style  and  the  position  of  the  discourse 
seem  to  change  the  conjecture  of  Poole,  al- 
most into  a  sweet  and  undoubting  convic- 
tion. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  other  Xew 
Testament  songs  of  praise,  in  which  the 
words  used  are  recorded.  The  songs  of 
Mary,  of  Zacharias,  and  of  Elizabeth,  in 
Luke,  1st  chapter,  are  of  this  class.  But 
the  words  of  their  praises  are  found  to  be, 
not  the  ivords  of  any  Old  Testament  Psalm. 


ON  PSALMODY.  43 

Well  then,  here  we  have  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, songs  of  praise;  a  "collection,,  of 
them,  indeed;  three  in  one  chapter. 

Another  case  is  recorded  in  Acts,  iv,  24- 
30.  Peter  and  John  being  released  from 
their  persecuting  foes,  returned  to  their 
friends,  and  recounted  to  them  all  that  had 
befallen  them,  And  the  company  "lifted  up 
their  voice  to  God,  with  one  accord,  and 
said,  Lord,  thou  art  God,  which  hast  made 
heaven  and  earth,"  &c.  But  these  are  not 
words  of  David  or  of  Asaph  the  seer. 
These  worshippers  introduce  part  of  an  Old 
Testament  Psalm,  but  do  not  confine  them- 
selves to  it.  This  is  truly  an  excellent 
model  of  a  Hymn;  the  Scriptures  are  hon- 
ored and  intelligently  applied  to  express 
sentiments  of  adoration,  gratitude  and  en- 
treaty, and  a  prophetic  Psalm  is  rightly 
appropriated  to  Jesus  by  name. 

A  third  case,  and  perhaps  the  most  une- 
quivocal of  all,  is  the  ascription  of  praise  to 
Christ,  on  his  public  entry  into  Jerusalem. 
It  is  recorded  in  Matt,  xxi,  9-15,  and  in 
parallel  passages  in  the  other  gospels.  It 
is  partly  in  the  language  of  an  Old  Testa- 
ment Psalm,  and  partly  not.  The  language 
of  the  children  is  not  at  all  in  the  words  of 
any  Psalm.  But  it  is  praise ;  and  the  Sa- 
vior approves  it,  and  cites  a  Psalm  (Ps.  viii, 
2,)  to  justify  it;  "Out    of  the   mouths   of 


44  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

babes    and   sucklings,  thou  hast    perfected 
})  raise" 

It  is  necessary  to  notice  some  allegations, 
that  have  been  made  in  relation  to  these 
cages  for  the  purpose  of  evading  the  argu- 
ment, which  they  offer  in  favor  of  using  oth- 
er songs  of  praise,  besides  the  one  hundred 
and  fifty  Psalms.  This  I  shall  do  in  the 
next  chapter. 


CHAPTER    VI. 


SOME   OBJECTIONS  NOTICED,  AND  MAIN  AR- 
GUMENT   FINISHED. 

1.  It  is  said,  that  the  New  Testament 
songs  referred  to,  are  inspired  compositions, 
and  so,  do  not  afford  any  justification  of 
the  use  of  uninspired  Hymns.  Well,  ad- 
mitting this,  does  not  the  fact  of  their  beiDg 
inspired  justify  us  in  using  them?  If 
then  the  claim  of  exclusive  right  for  the 
one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms,  must  be  giv- 
en up. 

But  it  is  not  certain  that  the  company, 
whose  Hymn  is  recorded  in  Acts,  iv,  24 
-30,  were  inspired  when  they  uttered  it. 
Indeed,  the  contrary  is  pretty  certain:  for 


ON     PSALMODY.  45 

it  is  said,  after  they  had  finished  their  Hymn, 
"And  when  they  had  prayed,  the  place  was 
shaken  where  they  were  assembled  together, 
and  they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  &c.  v.  31.  If  they  were  inspired, 
why  may  we  not  sing  their  Hymn,  which 
appears  to  be  very  suitable  for  celebrating 
the  majesty  of  Christ?  If  they  were  not 
inspired,  then  we  have  an  uninspired  Hymn 
recorded,  without  disapprobation,  by  an  in- 
spired writer.  Which  horn  of  the  dilemma 
will  be  chosen?  Both  are  equally  against 
the  opinion,  that  it  is  wrong  to  sing  any- 
thing but  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms. 
With  reference  xo  the  children,  in  the 
other  case,  there  is  not  the  least  reason  to 
believe  that  they  were  inspired.  And  yet 
our  Savior  approves  and  accepts  their  prai- 
ses, which  the  Chief  Priests  angrily  cen- 
sured. When  an  objector,  in  his  zeal  for  an 
inspired  Psalmody,  repudiates  inspired  songs 
of  praise,  I  cannot  but  think  there  is  some- 
thing inconsistent  and  wrong  in  his  position. 
It  is  hard  to  discover  what  would  satisfy 
those  who  reject  inspired  and  uninspired 
praises  alike.  And  I  would  seriously  ask 
my  dear  brethren  this  question:  Should  the 
children  in  one  of  your  Sabbath  Schools 
rise  up  in  your  presence,  and  with  their 
sweet  voices  sing  this  short  Hymn  to  Christ. 

"Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David;,f 


46  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

would  your  views  of  Psalmody  allow  you, 
like  the  blessed  Savior,  to  approve  of  the 
deed,  or  would  you,  like  the  Scribes,  be 
"sore  displeased." — v.  15. 

2.  It  is  further  alleged,  by  some  of  the 
more  extravagant  advocates  of  the  restric- 
tive system,  that  these  are  not  praises.  The 
songs  of  Zacharias,  and  of  Elizabeth,  and 
of  Mary,  not  praises  ?  They  certainly  have 
very  much  the  appearance  of  them.  Zach- 
arias said,  "  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of 
Israel,"  &c;  and  Mary  said,  "My  soul  doth 
magnify  the  Lord,"  &c;  the  people  and 
the  children  cried,  "Hosanna  to  the  son 
of  David,  blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord."  If  these  are  not  prais- 
es, it  is  hard  to  find  anything  that  is.  Be- 
sides, our  Savior,  in  justifying  the  children, 
intimates  the  character  of  their  ascriptions 
very  clearly,  "Out  of  the  mouths  of  babes 
and  sucklings,  thou  hast  perfected  praise ," 
and  Luke  says  of  Zacharias,  "  He  spake 
and  praised  God;"  and  in  his  narration  of 
Christ's  entry  into  Jerusalem,  "The  wThole 
multitude  of  the  disciples  began  to  rejoice 
and  praise  God."  Now,  when  a  person  as- 
serts that  these  are  not  praises,  he  seems  to 
me,  to  evince  great  confidence  in  the  easy 
faith  of  those  whom  he  addresses,  or  small 
knowledge  of  the  subject  of  which  he  speaks. 

3.  It  is  further  said,  that  these  passages 


ON    PSALMODY.  47 

were  not  sung,  or  expressed  in  musical  tones 
of  voice.  It  would  be  quite  as  serious  an 
objection  to  the  argument  derived  from  them, 
to  say  that  they  were  not  sung  in  a  particu- 
lar metre.  I  do  not  know  how  our  breth- 
ren found  out  that  they  were  not  sung.  If 
I  am  not  mistaken,  it  was  customary  to 
utter  such  poetic  strains  in  a  tone  of  voice 
different  from  the  ordinary  conversational 
or  declamatory  tones.  And  it  is  natural 
to  do  it.  Besides,  the  same  objection  would 
exclude  from  use  the  18th  Psalm,  for  "David 
spake  unto  the  Lord  the  words  of  this  song, 
and  he  said"  kc.  How  many  more  would 
be  excluded  by  this  formidable  objection,  I 
have  not  ascertained,  and  it  is  too  frivolous 
a  matter  to  pursue. 

It  is  supposed  that  they  could  not  have 
been  sung,  since  they  were  extemporaneous 
effusions.  I  cannot  perceive  why  extem- 
poraneous effusions  might  not  be  sung  as 
well  as  spoken,  and  why  the  disciples  could 
not  as  well  sing  "with  one  accord,"  as  speak 
"with  one  accord;"  and,  indeed,  this  man- 
ner would  seem  to  be  more  agreeable  to  the 
exercise  of  singing  than  of  speaking. 

It  may  be  well  enough,  however,  to  re- 
mark, for  the  benefit  of  the  ordinary  reader, 
that  if  we  apply  our  ideas  of  modern  hymns 
and  modern  singing,  to  the  ancient,  we  shall 
commit  a  great  error.     Those  Hymns  were 


48  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

not  divided  into  measured  lines  and  verses 
as  ours  are;  nor  was  their  singing  like  ours. 
It  was  customary,  under  the  influence  of 
strong  excitement  of  feeling,  to  utter  senti- 
ments in  a  kind  of  lofty  prose,  and  to  do  it 
in  a  singing  tone,  or  something  like  what  is 
called  recitative,  the  tones  of  which  are  be- 
tween singing  and  talking.  This  was  done 
extemporaneously,  and  however  numbers 
were  able  to  unite  in  it,  "with  one  accord," 
there  was  no  more  difficulty  in  doing  it  in  a 
singing  tone,  than  in  the  ordinary  tone  of 
speech. 

It  appears,  then,  notwithstanding  these 
objections,  that  in  the  New  Testament  we 
have  songs  of  praise,  both  inspired  and  un- 
inspired, some  including  portions  of  Psalms 
and  others  not,  and  we  have  no  disapproba- 
tion of  them,  or  of  their  use,  by  Christ  or 
his  Apostles;  but,  on  the  contrary,  their 
their  express  approval.  Yet,  because  they 
were  not  put  "into  a  book"  by  themselves, 
and  labeled,  A  New  Psalm  .Book,  it  is 
wrong  to  use  them,  or  any  of  those  precious 
praises  that  are  scattered  through  nearly 
all  the  Books  of  the  Bible. 

I  now  proceed  to  the  last  part  of  the 
great  argument  for  the  exclusive  use  of 
David's  Psalms,  viz.  that  "we  have  no  pro- 
mise of  the  aid  of  the  spirit  in  making 
Psalms"     This  is  a  mere  play  upon  words, 


ON  PSALMODY.  49 


not  comporting  with  the  sanctity  of  the 
subject,  nor  with  the  dignity  of  the  argu- 
ment upon  it.  We  have  the  promise  of  the 
Spirit  to  aid  us  in  worshipping  God,  and  we 
need  it  as  much  in  praising  as  in  praying. 
In  both  we  are  authorized  to  use  the  revela- 
tion of  the  Spirit,  all  of  which  is  profitable 
for  purposes  of  religious  edification.  There 
is  a  difference,  not  noticed  by  our  brethren 
in  using  this  part  of  their  argument,  between 
the  aid  of  the  Spirit  by  plenary  inspiration, 
and  his  ordinary  enlightening  and  sanctify- 
ing influences.  Inspiration  is  not  claimed 
for  Hymns  composed  by  men,  yet  the  aid  of 
the  Spirit  may  be  enjoyed  in  making  and 
in  singing  them.  And,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  inspired  Psalms  may  be  sung  without 
any  aid  of  the  Spirit.  The  brethren  surely 
cannot  mean  to  say,  that  in  singing  an  in- 
spired Psalm,  the  worshipper  does  not  him- 
self need  any  aid  of  the  Spirit,  to  render 
his  praises  acceptable.  Many  a  thoughtless 
and  ungodly  person  has  sung  that  sweet 
Psalm,  beginning 

"The  Lord's  my  shepherd,  I'll  not  want," 

but  surely  he  had  no  more  promise  of  the 
Spirit  or  experience  thereof,  in  so  doing, 
than  the  devout  christian  in  singing, 

"Jesus,  my  shepherd,  husband,  friend, 
My  prophet,  priest  and  king; 


50  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

My  Lord,  my  life,  my  way,  my  end, 
Accept  the  praise  T  bring.'7 

I  have  now  completed  the  review  of  the 
main  argument  for  the  exclusive  use  of  Da- 
vid's Psalms  in  praising  God.  Whether  I 
have  proved  that  it  does  not  show  a  "divine 
warrant"  for  restriction  to  a  particular  ver- 
sion, or  to  the  Psalms  in  any  version,  however 
perfect,  must  be  decided  by  the  reader.  It 
is  no  affectation  or  assurance,  however,  to 
say  that  I  have,  at  least,  shown  that  there 
is  occasion  and  room  for  some  doubt,  about 
the  exclusive  claim  for  the  Psalms.  And 
this  is  the  very  case  for  the  exercise  of  for- 
bearance. Brethren  who  are  no  farther 
asunder  than  the  Presbyterians  and  us, 
should  not  break  fellowship  for  such  a  dif- 
ference ;  and  we  may  be  committing  a  great 
sin  against  Christ,  by  shutting  out  the 
Presbyterian  people  from  our  communion, 
when  we  have  only  such  a  weak  and  tattered 
argument  for  our  own  views. 

Hitherto  I  have  spoken  negatively,  defen- 
sively, showing  that  the  "main  argument" 
is  not  sufficient  to  sustain  the  practice  of 
the  Associate  Reformed  Church.  I  shall 
now  undertake,  with  the  same  conciliatory 
design,  to  prove  from  the  Scriptures,  that 
we  have  divine  warrant  for  the  use  of  other 
songs  of  praise,  besides  those  contained  in 
the   Book   of  Psalms.      This   has,   indeed, 


ON     PSALMODY.  51 

been  done  to  some  extent  already,  but  I 
have  another  line  of  observation  to  pursue, 
in  drawing  forth  the  scripture  doctrine. 
The  Greek  scholar  will  excuse  the  unbookish 
manner  of  this  part  of  our  work-  I  sup- 
pose it  would  not  be  difficult  to  spread  some 
of  the  signs  of  learning  over  these  pages., 
by  the  help  of  a  small  printer's  font  of  He- 
brew and  Greek  type;  but  as  I  write  for 
plain  christian  people,  the  machinery  may 
as  A^ell  be  kept  out  of  view. 

Before  proceeding,  however,  a  remark  or 
two  may  be  made,  touching  the  demand 
for  a  "Scipture  warrant,"  as  authority  for 
singing  Hymns  and  Paraphrases  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  translations,  in  metre,  of  other 
portions  of  the  word  of  God  besides  the 
Psalms.  This  demand  can  hardly  be  made 
on  Presbyterians,  with  consistency,  by  those 
who,  in  very  important  matters,  might  be 
confounded  by  a  similar  demand  on  them- 
selves. As  I  have  before  intimated,  if  the 
demand  for  "divine  warrant"  for  singing, 
not  to  say  exclusively,  the  Psalms  of  David 
in  the  New  Testament  church,  were  urged 
upon  the  Associate  Reformed,  with  half  the 
pertinacity  they  use  in  pressing  a  similar 
demand  on  Presbyterians,  it  would  be  ex- 
tremely hard  to  meet  it.  For  it  has  been 
shown,  in  this  essay,  that  in  every  single 
case  in  which  the  Book  of  Psalms  is  certain- 


52  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

ly  referred  to,  in  the  New  Testament,  either 
by  name  or  by  quotation,  there  is  no  con- 
nexion with  singing  at  all:  and  again, 
that  in  every  case  in  the  New  Testament, 
where  we  have  the  language  of  song  actual- 
ly given,  it  is  not  the  language  of  David's 
Psalms. 

What  express  "divine  warrant"  is  there 
for  the  sanctification  of  the  first  day  of  the 
week?  We  have  warrant  sufficient,  "divine 
warrant,"  too,  but  not  more  express  than  we 
have,  as  will  be  shown,  for  using  other 
Psalms  and  Hymns.  Suppose  we  should 
reason  about  the  Sabbath  day  as  we  do 
about  the  Psalms :  There  was  a  Sabbath 
day  already,  divinely  appointed;  it  had  been 
kept  from  the  beginning ;  it  was  solemnly 
enjoined  in  the  Fourth  Commandment;  it 
is  expressly  referred  to  "by  name,"  in  the 
New  Testament;  and  it  was  observed  by 
our  Savior  and  his  Apostles ;  but  we  have  no 
command,  in  the  New  Testament,  to  keep 
another  day ;  therefore,  the  religious  obser- 
vance of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  as  the 
the  Sabbath,  is  a  corruption  of  the  divine 
ordinance.  The  reasoning  is  just  as  strong, 
or  rather,  just  as  weak,  in  this  case  as  in 
that  of  singing  and  praise;  and  both  are 
answered  in  the  same  way.  This  answer,  in 
the  case  of  Psalm  and  Hymn  singing,  will 
occupy  the  next  chapter. 


ON    PSALMODY.  53 

Again;  What  express  divine  warrant  is 
there  for  infant  baptism  ?  We  have  excel- 
lent arguments,  and  scriptural  ones ;  but 
have  we  any  more  express  "divine  warrant" 
than  we  have  for  singing  uninspired  hymns? 
It  is  only  my  determination  to  be  brief,  to 
suggest  thought  rather  than  exhaust  it,  that 
prevents  me  from  pressing  this  inquiry,  in 
extended  illustration.  Instead  of  this,  I 
will  refer  the  reader  to  a  singular  logical 
fact.  One  of  my  Associate  Reformed  breth- 
ren has  written  a  work  on  Psalmody,  which 
is  deemed  to  be  a  strong  one.  He  has  also 
written  a  work  of  about  the  same  size,  on 
Baptism,  a  part  of  which  is  of  course  de- 
voted to  the  doctrine  of  the  baptism  of  in- 
fants. Now,  what  is  singular  about  these 
two  books  is,  that  the  author's  principles 
and  modes  of  reasoning  in  the  one  are 
quite  antagonistic  to  those  of  the  other. 
This  is  specially  noticeable  in  relation  to 
the  demand  for  "  divine  warrant."  On 
Psalmody,  an  express  divine  warrant  is  the 
basis  of  the  main  argument  for  the  exclusive 
use  of  the  Psalms,  and  the  want  of  it  is  deem- 
ed fatal  to  the  opposite  views;  but  on  baptism, 
the  author  says,  "It  is  altogether  unreason- 
able to  demand  positive  and  express  proof 
from  the  New  Testament,  to  show  that  chil- 
dren of  believers  *  *  *  have  a  right 
B2 


M  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

to  baptism. "  Similar  contrarieties  occur 
throughout  the  treatises.  If  I  were  desi- 
rous to  refute  either  one  of  these  books,  I  do 
not  think  a  more  effective  method  could  be 
chosen,  than  to  take  the  mode  of  reasoning 
"which  is  pursued  by  the  same  author  in  the 
other.  Although  the  advocate  of  the  exclu- 
sive use  of  David's  Psalms  cannot  consis- 
tently demand  a  "divine  wrrrant"  for  using 
other  Psalms  and  Hymns,  and  spiritual 
80ngS,  yet  I  have  no  desire  to  evade  it. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


POSITIVE  ARGUMENT,  FROM    SCRIPTURE,  FOR 
THE  USE  OF  OTHER  SONGS  OF  PRAISE. 

What  is  the  teachir  g  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  relation  to  the  Psalms  of  David 
and  their  use?  This  is  the  grand  question. 
If  we  ascertain  what  this  is,  it  matters  little 
what  one  writer  or  another  may  teach  on 
the  subject.  Well,  it  is  certain  that  the 
words,  Psalms,  Hymns,  singing,  praise,  are 
not  unfrequently  met  with  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. And  they  were,  doubtless,  well 
understood  by  those  who  used  them.  The 
same  is   true    of  the   words   prophet,   law, 


ON  PSALMODY.  55 


scriptures,  prophecy,  &c.  These  are  all 
general  terms;  the.  were  so  then ;  and  their 
specific  sense  and  application  must  be  de- 
termined by  the  circumstances  in  which  they 
are  used  in  particular  cases.  Hence,  the 
bare  use  of  the  word  Psalm  does  not  neces- 
sarily designate  a  Psalm  of  David,  any  more 
than  the  bare  use  of  the  word  prophet 
designates  a  particular  prophet,  as  Isaiah, 
Ezekiel,  or  Daniel.  When  there  is  refer- 
ence to  any  particular  thing  or  person,  of  a 
kind  or  class,  the  reference  is  certified  by 
some  attendant  circumstance.  This  mani- 
testly  correct  principle  of  interpretation  is 
always  observed  by  the  New  Testament  wri- 
ters. Let  us  now  apply  it  to  the  use  of  the 
wor-i  Psalm. 

In  the  original  cf  the  New  Testament 
this  word  is  used  but  seven  times.  In  the 
Engl'sh  translation,  it  occurs  a  few  times 
more,  verbs  and  participles  being  so  trans- 
lated as  to  include  it.  I  give  the  texts,  with 
a  few  hints  on  them,  for  explanation. 

Luke  xx,  42. — ki  A_nd  David  himself  saith. 
in  the  Book  of  Psalms,  the  Lord  said  unto 
my  Lord,"  kc.  Here  the  name  of  the 
writer,  the  title  of  his  book,  and  the  quota- 
tion from  it,  conspire  to  fix,  beyond  dispute, 
the  application  of  the  word. 

Luke  xxiv,  44. — ^;A11  things  which  are 
written  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  in  the 


56  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

Prophets,  and  in  the  Psalms,"  &c.  Here 
the  conjunction  of  the  Psalms  with  the  Law 
of  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  assures  us  that 
the  Psalms  of  the  Old  Testament  are  inten- 
ded, and  especially,  as  all  the  authorities 
referred  to  are  included  in  what  imis  written 
in  the  Sciiptures." — v.  45. 

Acts  i,  20. — uIt  is  written  in  the  book  of 
Psalms,  Let  his  habitation,"  kc.  The  men- 
tion of  the  book  and  the  quotation,  identify 
the  reference.  The  same  is  true  of  Acts 
xiii,  83.  fciIt  is  written  in  the  second 
Psalm,  Thou  art  my  son,"  &c.  See  also 
verse  35. 

1  Cor.  xiv,  26. — "  Every  one  hath  a 
Psalm,"  fee.  Here  the  general  term  is 
used,  without  anything  by  which  its  refer- 
ence can  be  determined  to  any  particular 
one. 

Eph.  v,  19,  and  Col.  iii,  16.— "  Psalms, 
hymns  and  spiritual  songs."  The  same  re- 
mark applies  to  these  as  to  the  passage 
alluded  to  just  above.  As  there  is  nothing 
to  indicate  a  reference  to  the  Old  Testament 
Psalms  in  either  of  them,  the  words  being 
simply  used  in  their  general  form  and  signi- 
fication, they  are  properly  applicable  to  any 
compositions  that  agree  with  the  definition 
of  the  words  themselves.  These  are  all  the 
passages  in  which  the  word  Psalm  occurs  in 
the  original  of  the  New  Testament. 


ON    PSALMODY.  57 

There  are  a  few  passages  more,  in  which 
it  occurs  in  the  English,  where  the  verbs  or 
participles  are  so  translated  as  to  include  it. 
As  Matt,  xxvi,  80,  and  Mark,  xiv,  26. — 
"When  they  had  sung  a  hymn;"  literally, 
having  hymned.  Acts,  xvi,  25.  "Paul 
and  Silas  sang  praises  unto  God;"  literally, 
but  less-  clearly,  hymned  to  God,  James 
v,  13.  "Let  him  sing  psalms;"  literally, 
let  him  sing;  as  in  1  Cor.  xiv,  15,  and 
Rom.  xv,  9;  where  the  same  word  (4a?.?.u)  is 
translated,  simply.  "I  will  sing." 

In  none  of  these  is  there  anything  what- 
ever to  designate  the  Old  Testament  Psalms. 
Even  the  word  Psalm  is  not  used  in  all  of 
them ;  and  where  it  is  used,  there  is  nothing 
except  its  general  meaning  to  indicate  such 
reference.  But  its  general  meaning  is  not, 
according  to  the  principles  of  interpretation, 
sufficient;  for  this  applies  to  any  composi- 
tion answering  the  definition  of  the  word. 
To  apply  it,  in  these  cases,  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Psalms  is,  therefore,  a  mere  assump- 
tion, and  constitutes  what  reasoners  call 
begging  the  question  in  dispute.  But  we 
will  not  leave  this  matter  yet,  lest  we  should 
appear  to  beg  the  question  too. 

The  word  prophet  is  a  general  one,  and, 
like  the  word  Psalm,  is  often  used  in  the 
Xew  Testament,  for  the  purpose  of  citing 
Old  Testament  writings.     And   it    is    also 


58  A  PLEA    FOR  PEACE 

used  in  its  general  signification.  But  there 
is  always  a  clear  distinction  observable  be- 
tween, its  general  and  its  specific  applica- 
tions. Luke  ir,  24. — UA  prophet  is  not 
without  honor,"  &c.  Matt,  x,  4. — "  He  that 
receiveth  a  prophet  in  the  name  of  a  pro- 
phet," &c.  Here  the  term  is  used  in  a 
general  sense,  simply  to  designate  an  office, 
or  any  person  bearing  it,  and  is  not  applied 
to  any  particular  one.  Again;  ;,In  those 
days  there  came  prophets  from  Jerusalem 
to  Antioch." — Acts  xi,  27.  "There  were 
in  the  church  that  was  in  Antioch,  certain 
prophets  and  teachers." — Acts  xiii,  1.  uJu- 
das  and  Silas  being  prophets  also  them- 
selves."— Acts  xv,  32.  '-God  hath  set  in 
the  church,  first  apostles,  secondarily  pro- 
phets," kc. — 1  Cor.  xii,  28.  Now,  in  all 
these,  and  many  more  instances,  the  general 
term,  descriptive  of  the  office,  is  so  qualified 
by  the  circumstances  of  its  use,  as  clearly 
to  restrict  its  application  to  contemporane- 
ous persons,  and  to  preclude  its  application 
to  the  Old  Testament  prophets.  Paul  calls 
even  a  heathen  poet  a  prophet,  simply  be- 
cause he  was  so  considered  by  them,  and 
because  the  word,  in  their  language,  meant 
both  a  soothsayer  and  a  poet. — Tit.  i,  12. 

On  the  other  hand,  when  the  Old  Testa- 
ment prophets  are  referred  to,  that  applica- 
tion is  clearly  indicated  by  various  means.: 


ON     PSALMODY.  59 


their  names  are  mentioned,  or  quotations 
are  made  from  their  writings.  And  in  this 
way  the  Psalms  themselves  are  quoted,  just 
as  any  other  prophecies  are :  "  That  it  might 
be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  pro- 
phet, they  parted  my  garments, "&e. — Matt, 
xxvii,  35 ;  Ps.  xxii,  18.  See  also  Matt,  xiii, 
35;  Ps.  lxxviii,  2. 

Another,  and  most  common  method  of 
referring  to  the  Old  Testament  writers,  is 
to  prefix  the  definite  article  to  the  word, 
and  then  instead  of  a  general,  it  must  have 
a  specific  application.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Greek  article  is  briefly  this;  that  when  a 
class  of  things  bear  the  same  general  name, 
no  one  in  particular  can  be  indicated  unless 
the  article  is  prefixed,  or  some  equivalent 
method  of  specifying  be  employed.  It  is 
the  same  as  it  is  in  English:  if  I  say,  "a 
Grecian  poet,"  it  might  be  any  one;  but  if 
I  say,  "the  Grecian  poet,"  I  indicate  a  par- 
ticular one.  Applied  to  this  subject,  we 
learn  from  this  rule  and  usage,  that  the 
general  words,  prophet,  psalm,  song,  hymn, 
mean  any  prophet,  psalm,  song  or  hymn, 
for  the  words  describe  them  respectively. 
But  when  the  definite  article  is  prefixed, 
some  particular  prophet,  psalm,  kc.  is  in- 
tended. What  particular  one  is  meant,  must 
be  ascertained  by  the  circmstances  in  which 
the   words   are   used.      We    have    already 


60  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

shown  that,  with  reference  to  the  Prophets 
and  the  Psalms,  this  is  done  by  mentioning 
authors'  names,  by  quotations,  and  other 
ways.  The  following  examples  will  confirm 
these  statements  and  afford  very  striking 
illustrations  of  the  principles  we  have  ad- 
duced. John  the  Baptist  was  a  prophet, 
was  owned  by  Christ  as  an  eminent  one. 
Yet  when  the  Jews  asked  himy  art  thou  the 
prophet?  he  unhesitatingly  declines  the  ap- 
pellation. He  was  a  prophet,  but  not  the 
prophet.  The  use  of  the  article  makes  this 
difference,  and  he  well  knew  that  its  use 
indicated  a  specific  reference  to  the  Messiah. 
Again,  among  the  many  opinions  concern- 
ing Christ,  some  thought  him  "a  prophet," 
others  as  "one  of  the  prophets."  The  wo- 
man at  Jacob's  well  readily  discovered,  by 
his  conversation,  that  Jesus  was  a  prophet, 
or  religious  teacher ;  but  the  Jewish  people, 
better  instructed  in  the  Scriptures,  when 
they  heard  his  sayings,  said,  "Of  a  truth, 
this  is  the  prophet,"  meaning  the  Messiah. 
John  iv,  19;  vii,  40.  So  also  when  the 
word  prophets  is  used  in  the  plural,  with 
the  article,  it  indicates,  unless  restrained  by 
attendant  circumstances,  the  Old  Testament 
prophets. 

I  trust  these  remarks  and  examples  make 
the  force  of  the  article  sufficiently  manifest. 
In  reasoning  this  point  with  brethren,  I  have 


ON    PSALMODY.  61 

seen  them  shrink  from  the  argument  behind 
a  declaration  of  this  sort,  that  the  article 
was  not  of  sufficient  consequence,  and  its 
use  was  not  well  enough  understood  to  be 
made  the  foundation  of  any  argument  on 
this  subject.  I  am  willing  that  persons 
should  confess  want  of  knowledge,  for  them- 
selves, but  some  doubt  may  spring  up  about 
the  propriety  of  their  including  the  sacred 
writers,  of  any  others  in  their  confessions. 
Should  we  discard  the  doctrine  of  the  arti- 
cle, it  would  convert  Nathan's  rebuke  of 
David,  "Thou  art  the  man,",  into  something 
lying  between  commendation  and  nonsense, 
"  Thou  art  a  man."  And  those  who  profess 
to  be  theologians,  especially,  should  be  cau- 
tious about  trifling  with  the  Greek  article. 
It  is  a  small  word,  composed  of  a  single 
letter ;  but  they  should  know,  that  on  this 
small  jewelled  point  turns  some  of  the 
strongest  scripture  argumentation  for  the 
divinity  of  our  Savior. 

I  now  respectfully  solicit  the  readers  at- 
tention to  the  application  of  these  principles 
of  interpretation,  and  this  doctrine  of  the 
article  to  some  of  the  passages  of  scripture 
already  cited.  1  Cor.  xiv.  26.— "When  ye 
come  together,  every  one  of  you  hath  a 
psalm,  hath  a  doctrine,  hath  a  tongue,"  &c% 
These  were  gifts  of  the  spirit  to  the  Corin- 
thian christians,  and  the  Apostle  only 
B3 


62  A    PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

blames  the  disorderly  manner  in  which  they 
tirere  exercised.  It  appears  that  they  prayed 
and  sang  in  an  unknown  tongue  ;  that  is,  in 
a  language  not  understood  by  those  who 
heard  them.  This  was  a  perversion  of  their 
miraculous  spiritual  powers.  They  might, 
it  is  true,  exercise  them  in  this  way  to  their 
own  edification,  but  it  would  be  without  ben- 
efit to  others,  for  they  knew  not  the  mean- 
ing, ver.  14,  16.  To  remedy  this  evil  in 
the  manner  of  exercising  their  spiritual 
gifts,  the  apostle  proposes  his  own  example 
for  their  imitation:  he  would  have  them 
pray  and  sing  in  a  known  language,  or  em- 
ploy an  interpreter,  the  same  as  in  preach- 
ing, ver.  27.  "I  will  pray  with  the  spirit, 
and  I  will  pray  with  the  understanding  also;  I 
will  sing  with  the  spirit,  and  I  will  sing  with 
the  understanding  also."  ver.  15.  That  is, 
my  praying  and  singing  shall  not  be  merely 
in  the  exhibition  of  my  spiritual  gifts,  but 
shall  be  intelligible,  with  meaning,  that 
others  may  understand  and  profit. 

From  the  omission  of  the  article  before 
the  word  psalm,  from  the  connexion  of  that 
word  with  the  extraordinary  spiritual  gifts, 
and  from  the  train  of  reasoning  throughout 
the  chapter,  it  is  evident,  that  the  psalms 
offered  in  the  Corinthian  church  were  such 
as  the  spirit  enabled  the  christians  there  to 
&ake,  and  not  psalms  of  the  old  testament. 


ON    PSALMODY.  63 


The  close  parellel  here  observed  by  the 
apostle,  between  praying  and  singing,  shows 
them  to  be  religious  exercises  occupying  the 
same  rank,  and  substantially  of  the  same 
character.  And  this  fact  upsets  those  arti- 
ficial and  hair-splitting  distinctions  between 
prayer  and  praise,  which  some  writers  on 
psalmody  have  made,  for  their  own  mere 
convenience,  without  any  authority  from  the 
Bible,  and  with  very  little  from  the  diction- 
ary. I  mean  those  distinctions  which  rep- 
resent praise  as  a  more  awfully  solemn,  fixed 
and  uniform  exercise  than  prayer,  as  invol- 
ving more  need  of  the  aid  of  the  spirit,  as 
requiring  to  be  more  accurate  in  its  state- 
ment. Such  wire-drawTing  is  not  found  either 
in  our  catechism,  or  in  the  Scriptures,  where 
prayer,  thanksgiving  and  praise  are  terms 
used  to  express  the  same  acts  of  worship, 
many  of  the  Psalms  being  called  prayers, 
and  all  of  them,  whether  expressive  of  grat- 
itude, adoration  or  supplication,  being  called 
praises. 

The  two  passages,  Eph.  v,  19  and  Col. 
iii,  16,  deserve  particular  consideration. 
They  have  always  a  place  in  discussions  of 
this  subject.  I  have  no  interest  to  give 
them  a  wrong  interpretation.  The  inter- 
pretation, of  the  one  will  do  for  both.  I 
take  the  one  which  contains  the  fuller  ex- 
pression, Col.  iii,  16.     And  to  cut  off  all  su- 


64 


A    PLEA    FOR    PEACE 


perfluity  of  words,  I  remark  that  this  text 
includes  three  brief  directions;  1.  Let  the 
word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly:  2. 
Teach  and  admonish  one  another  in  all  wis- 
dom, (see  Col.  i,  9:)  3.  "Sing  psalms,  hymns 
and  spiritual  songs  to  the  Lord,  with  grace 
in  your  hearts,"  doing  all  in  the  name  of  the 
the  Lord  Jesus.  I  dismiss  all,  and  it  is  not 
a  little,  that  has  been  said  on  both  sides  of 
the  question,  to  connect  the  "psalms,  hymns 
and  spiritual  songs,"  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  verse,  with  "the  word  of  Christ,"  in  the 
former  part;  I  pass  no  judgment  upon  those 
efforts,  as  my  interpretation  is  independent 
of  them. 

The  only  question  pertinent  to  the  present 
treatise  is,  whether  the  psalms,  hymns  and 
spiritual  songs  mentioned  here  are  those  of 
the  Old  Testament  alone,  or  any  other  com- 
positions, together  with  them,  which  answer 
the  definition  of  the  terms  employed.  To 
say  the  former,  is  entirely  gratuitous,  for 
David's  name  is  not  mentioned,  his  book  is 
not  spoken  of,  no  quotation  is  made,  and 
the  article  is  not  used,  not  one  of  the  usual 
ways  of  making  a  reference  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures  is  employed.  Why  then 
should  the  word  be  understood  as  referring 
to  the  Old  Testament  Psalms?  Only  be- 
cause the  word  psalm  is  used.  But  the  word 
is  a  general  one,  decriptive  of  a  certain  kind 


ON    PSALMODY.  60 

of  composition ;  and  it  is  properly  applied  to 
compositions  of  this  kind,  whether  they  are 
found  in  the  book  of  psalms,  or  elsewhere- 
Had  the  apostle  meant  to  confine  his  ref- 
erence to  the  Psalms  of  David,  he  would 
have  said,  uin  the  psalms,  hymns  and  spir- 
itual songs."  And  even  then,  it  would  not 
fix  the  obligation  to  use  them  and  no  others. 
If  we  should  admit  that  nothing  else  but  the 
Psalms  of  David  was  referred  to  or  included 
in  this  expression,  that  admission  would 
not  help  our  brethren's  case  at  all.  They 
would  still  have  the  only  hard  part  of  their 
case  to  make  out.  Suppose  I  say  to  my 
Associate  Reformed  brother,  who  is  strain- 
ing this  passage  to  prove  that  it  refers  to 
the  Psalms  of  David  alone,  Brother,  you 
need  not  trouble  yourself  to  do  it:  you  need 
not  trace  the  slender  affinity  between  these 
terms  and  the  titles  of  the  Psalms:  you  need 
not  assume  that  the  Ephesians  and  Colos- 
sians  would  naturally  and  immediately  un- 
derstand these  words  to  mean  the  Psalms  of 
David;  I  will  admit  it  ail.  Then  you  admit 
all  I  maintain,  he  gladly  replies.  Oh  no,  I 
do  not;  for  you  have  yet  the  hardest  part  of 
your  task  to  perforin,  viz:  to  show  that  the 
expression  fixes  the  obligation  to  sing  the 
Psalms  of  David,  to  the  exclusion  of  every 
thing  else;  hie  opus,  hie  labor  est,  f rater. 
I  will  illustrate  by  a  plain  parallel.  Christ 
B3* 


A    PLBA   FOR    PEACE 


.  "Search  the  Scriptures."  This  refers 
indubitably  and  exclusively  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writings,  but  it  doesnotfixon  us  the  obli- 
gation toread  those  writings  to  the  exclusion 
I]  others.  So,  admitting  the  verse  un- 
der consideration  to  refer  to  the  Book  of 
Psalms,  it  does  not  bind  us  to  sing  them  to 
the  exclusion  of  all  others. 

But  I  do  not  admit  that  it  refers  exclu- 
sively to  the  Psalms  of  David.  A  just 
regard  for  the  principles  of  interpretation 
will  not  e  to  do  so,  for  the  reasons 

already  stated;  viz,  that  there  is  nothing  to 
identify  them  in  the  expression,  except  the 
bare  use  of  the  general  terms,  descriptive  of 
hinds  of  compositions,  and  that  is  not 
^uiheic-n. 

Ephesus  and  Colosse  were  cities  in  which 
the  Greek  language  was  spoken,  and  among 
the  Greeks  the  words  psalm  and  hymn 
were  as  well  understood  and  as  commonly 
used  as  the  words  song,  sonnet  and  poem 
are  with  us:  and  the  bare  mention  of  thes? 
would  not  necessarily  suggest  the  idea  of 
David's  Psalms,  any  more  than  the  n 
sonnet  would  suggest  to  us  the  sonnets  of 

CO 

Petrarch,  or  the  word  poem,  the  poems  of 
Cowper.  These  terms  occur  in  the  Greek 
classics,  and  they  are  each  connected  with 
families  of  above  twenty  derivative  words, 
from  a  common  root.     This  fact  shows  how 


OX    PSALMODY.  67 


extensively  they  were  used,  and  how  readily 
they  would  be  understood  in  their  general 
sense. 

But  it  is  said,  that  these  terms  are  the  titles 
of  the  Psalms,  and  so  identify  tbe  reference. 
It  will  not  pass  as  good  argument.  Although 
the  coincidence  between  these  terms  and  the 
titles  of  David's  productions  were  as  close 
as  is  pretended,  yet,  the  omission  of  the 
article  is  fatal  to  the  argument:  for  we  have 
shown  that  prophets  and  prophecies  are 
mentioned  in  the  Xew  Testament,  which  cer- 
tainly do  iwt  refer  to  those  in  the  old, 
although  there  are  books  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, bearing  these  titles,  and  these  alone. 
But,  secondly,  these  terms  do  not  very 
closely  correspond  with  the  titles  of  the  Old 
Testament  songs.  This  will  best  appear 
by  comparing  them.  Take  the  titles  cf  a 
few,  promiscuously  chosen:  Psal.  3d,  kiA 
psalm  of  David;"  16th,  UA  writing  of  Da^, 
17th,  "A  prayer  of  David;"  30th,  "A  psalm 
of  a  song;''  37th,  "A  song  of  David;"  64th. 
"A  song  of  a  psalm;"  89th,  "Praise,  a  song  of 
David;"  103d,  "Allelulia;"  120th,  "A  song 
of  Degrees,"  <fcc.  A  great  many  have  no  ti- 
tles at  all.  These  titles  are  taken  from  the 
Septuagint  version,  which  was  generally 
used  in  apostolic  times.  No  sufficient 
resemblance  can  be  traced  between  the  words 
of  the  text  under   consideration  and  these 


68  A   PLEA   FOR    PEACE 


titles,  to  identify  a  reference,  and  on  such 
slender  grounds  no  judicious  reasoner,  unless 
in  extremity,  would  rest  any  argument. 

But  it  has  been  farther  said  by  our 
brethren,  to  aid  their  use  of  this  passage, 
that  these  churches  of  Ephesus  and  Colosse, 
had  the  Psalms  of  David,  and  they  had  no 
other.  I  incline  to  the  belief  that  their 
statement  is  incorrect  in  both  its  parts. 
These  churches  were  collected  in  heathen 
cities;  they  had  lately  been  converted  from 
heathenism  or  from  Judaism;  books  were 
scarce  and  costly  articles  then;  and  it  is  not 
very  likely  that  they  had  much  knowledge 
of  the  Scriptures,  except  what  they  learned 
from  the  public  reading  of  them  in  the  syna- 
gogues or  churches.  Secondly,  if  at  Corinth 
psalms  were  so  abundant,  as  the  production 
of  the  spiritual  gifts  of  the  disciples,  that 
"every  one  had  a  psalm,"  I  know  not  why 
psalms  of  the  same  kind  should  be  scarce  at 
Colosse. 

After  all,  as  I  have  said  above,  this  effort 
and  show  of  reasoning  is  superfluous,  for  it 
is  not  denied  by  any  good  interpreter,  that 
the  tevms  of  this  passage  include  the  Psalms 
of  David.  We  admit,  before  our  brethren 
laboriously  reason  the  case,  that  the  Psalms 
of  David  arc  deluded:  and  after  they  have 
finished,  they  fail  to  show  that  other  scrip- 
ture songs    or  other  scriptural  songs,   are 


ON    PSALMODY.  69 

excluded.  These  verses;  by  the  general, 
unqualified  terms  employed  in  them,  enjoin 
'he  use  of  any  religious,  scriptural  songs  of 
oraise,  without  specifying,  and  of  course 
without  excluding  inspired  or  uninspired 
productions. 

If  this  interpretation  be  correct,  then  here 
•ve  have  the  long  demanded  "scripture  ivar- 
"ant"  for  the  use  of  other  songs  of  praise 
>eside  those  contained  in  the  Book  of 
'^salms.  Others  are  not  to  be  used  "in  the 
oom"  of  the  Bible  Psalms,  but  in  addition 
o  them,  along  with  them.  Other  songs  of 
scripture,  properly  versified,  are  no  less  an 
inspired  psalmody,  than  those  of  the  Book 
of  Psalms.  And  hymns  and  paraphrases 
constitute  an  approved  uninspired  psalmody. 

Having  now  completed  another  department 
of  the  subject,  may  I  not  say  to  dear  christian 
brethren,  this  is  just  the  case  for  the  exercise  of 
forbearance.  The  main  argument  tfor  the 
exclusive  use  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Psalms,  appears  to  some  persons,  defective; 
the  New  Testament  appears  to  them,  to  give 
a  warrant  for  the  use  of  other  orthodox  and 
edifying  songs  of  praise,  in  addition  to  those 
of  the  Old  Testament.  May  we  not  hope 
that  some  will  extend  their  christian  for- 
bearance and  fellowship  to  those  who  agree 
with  them  in  every  point  of  faith  and  order y 
except  this  ?     And  if  we  may  hope  for  con- 


70  A   PLEA   FOE   PEACE 

filiation  between  those  who  differ  only  about 
the  exclusive  use  of  Bible  Psalms;  we  may 
hope,  with  even  more  confidence  for  such 
reconciliation  between  those  who  only  differ 
about  the  obligation  to  restrict  ourselves  to 
the  Scotch  version,  or  any  other  particular 
one.  If  we  are  not  perfectly  agreed  in  all 
things  "whereunto  we  have  attained,  let  us 
walk  by  the  same  rule,  let  us  mind  the  same 
thing.' ' 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


POSITIVE  ARGUMENT,  FROM  THE  HISTORY 
OF  THE  ANCIENT  CHURCH. 

As  the  mind  naturally  follows  the  onward 
progress  of  things,  the  inquirer  after  truth 
on  this  subject  will  ask,  what  was  the  usage 
of  the  early  church,  in  relation  to  Psalmody? 
Let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  that  for  the  inter- 
pretation of  Scripture  we  do  not  require  the 
aid  of  the  ancient  christian  writers,  we  hav- 
ing the  oracles  of  God  ourselves,  and  as 
good  helps  for  understanding  them  as  they 
had.  But,  as  historians,  they  are  of  use  to 
fiu ;  nor  are  they  silent  concerning  the 
order  and  mode  of  worship  in  their  times. 


ON    PSALMODY.  71 


We  do  not  refer  to  them  as  authority,  or  for 
agument,  but  for  information. 

Before  giving  the  testimony  of  christian 
writers,  I  will  notice  an  incidental  reference 
to  the  custom  of  christians,  in  the  celebrated 
letter  of  Pliny  to  Trajan.  Pliny  was  thirty- 
seven  years  old,  at  the  time  of  the  death  of 
the  apostle  John,  and  this  letter  was  written 
in  the  very  beginning  of  the  second  century. 
He  says  of  the  Christians,  "They  are  ac- 
customed among  themselves,  alternately,  to 
rehearse  a  song  to  Christ  as  a  God.'7  The 
expression,  'among  themselves,  alternately,' 
secum  invicere,  seems  to  correspond  with 
the  Greek  uw*ous%  "to  yourselves,"  in  Eph. 
v,  18,  and  Col.  iii,  16.  Beza  translates  it, 
inter  vos,  mutuo,  between  you,  reciprocally. 

Justin  Martyr  lived  about  the  middle  of 
the  second  century,  Eusebius  mentions  his 
having  written  a  work  called  Psaltes,  the 
Psalmist.  Tertullian,  a  little  later  in  the 
same  century,  wrote  as  follows,  in  reference 
to  the  custom  of  singing  in  the  church : 
"Each  one  is  called  out  into  the  midst,  to 
sing  unto  God,  either  from  the  Scriptures 
or  from  his  own  mind,  as  he  is  able."  De 
Scripturis  vel  de  proprio  ingenio.  [See 
Poole's  Synopsis  on  Matt,  xxv,  30. 

Eusebius,  in  his  history  of  the  first  three 
centuries,  quotes  a  certain  writer,  as  using 
the  following  language  to  prove  against  the 


73  A    PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

Arians,  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  that 
it  had  been  held  in  the  church  from  the  be- 
ginning: "Who  does  not  know  the  works  of 
Ireneus  and  Melito  and  the  rest,  in  which 
Christ  is  announced  as  God?  Whatever 
Psalms  and  Hymns  were  written  by  the 
brethren  from  the  beginning,  celebrate  Christ, 
the  Word  of  God,  by  asserting  his  divinity." 
He  also  says  that  Paul  of  Samosata  "stopped 
the  Psalms  that  were  sung  in  honor  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  late  compositions 
of  modern  men."  In  conformity  with  these 
and  other  historical  testimonies  in  the  an- 
cient writers,  the  learned  Xeander  says, 
-"The  Hymns  used  in  the  worship  of  God 
were  appealed  to,  in  the  second  and  begin- 
ning of  the  third  century,  in  proof  of  the 
incarnation  and  divinity  of  Christ."  Hist, 
pp.  192,  376. 

I  make  no  comments  on  these  historical 
testimonies.  They  show,  as  plain  as  lan- 
guage can  express  it,  that  hymns  of  human 
composition  were  used  in  the  second  century. 
I  have  known  persons  try  to  pervert  some  of 
them  to  the  opposite  service,  but  they  have 
always  demonstrated,  by  their  efforts,  that 
it  was  contrary  to  the  natural  meaning  and 
intent  of  the  words.  The  case  from  Ter- 
tullian  has  never  before,  I  think,  been  cited 
in  the  discussion  of  this  subject.  It  would 
b©  worth  an  effort  of  some  practiced  sophist. 


ON    PSALMODY.  73 


to  try  what  he  could  make  out  of  the  words 
ude  proprio  ingenio,"  favorable  to  the  ex- 
clusive  use  of  the  Psalms. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

GLANCE  AT  THE  PSALMODY  OF  THE  REFORMA- 
TION PERIOD  AND   OLD  PSALMODY 

CONTROVERSIES. 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  churches  of  the 
Reformation  were  long,  if  they  were  for  any 
period,  without  singing  in  their  public  wor- 
ship. But  there  is  a  short  interval,  in  which 
it  is  difficult  to  tell  what  was  the  manner  of 
conducting  this  part  of  their  worship,  or 
what  songs  were  used.  They  may  have 
continued  some  of  the  old  Hymns  and 
Chants  to  which  they  had  been  accustomed, 
and  they  may  have  prepared  Hymns  for 
themselves.  The  attention  of  the  Reform- 
ers was  principally  directed  to  the  propaga- 
tion of  the  gospel  doctrines  and  the  recov- 
ery of  the  people  from  the  errors  and 
superstitions  of  Popery. 

The  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  it  is 
well  known,  spread  rapidly  in  France,  and 
were  embraced  by  persons  of  the  highest 
CI 


7-4  A   PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

distinction  and  learning.  Many  avowed 
their  attachment  to  them  publicly,  and 
many,  who  made  no  change  in  their  former 
relation  to  the  old  religious  establishment, 
gave  the  Reformed  doctrines  their  approba- 
tion and  influence. 

About  the  year  1540,  a  French  poet, 
named  Clement  Marot,  who-  regarded  the 
Reformation  with  favor,  translated  the  first 
fifty  Psalms  into  French  verse,  and  dedicated 
his  work,  in  a  somewhat  fanciful  and  flatter- 
ing style,  to  Francis  I,  the  reigning  monarch, 
to  whom  also  Calvin  dedicate  Jhis  celebrated 
Institutes.  Marot  was  a  court  poet,  a  pop- 
ular writer,  though  not  at  this  time  a  very 
exemplary  character.  His  translation  of 
the  Psalms  was  not  intended  by  him  for  use 
in  the  -  public  worship  of  God,  although 
thev  afterwards  became  a  powerful  auxiliary 
to  the  spread  of  the  Reformed  religion,  by 
their  pervading  influence  on  the  minds  of 
the  people.  He  adapted  his  measures  to  the 
popular  tunes,  which  had  hitherto  been  asso- 
ciated with  songs,  many  of  which  were  far 
from  being  of  a  good  moral  tendency. 
From  their  being  the  work  of  a  popular 
poet,  and  from  their  being  fitted  to  familiar 
and  favorite  tunes,  and  from  the  novelty  of 
their  themes,  they  soon  gained  a  wide-spread 
popularity.  They  were  sung  by  the  gallants 
of  the  court,  and  by  the  nobility,  male  and 


ON  PSALMODY.  T5 


female,  and  shortly  resounded  through  all 
the  streets  of  Paris,  being  sung  to  the  com- 
mon vaudevilles  and  street  tunes,  and  often 
with  the  accompaniment  of  the  fiddle. 

There  seemed  to  be  no  thought  of  employ- 
ing them  in  the  exercise  of  worship;  for,  at 
this  time  and  for  twelve  or  fifteen  years 
afterwards,  there  was  no  organized  Protes- 
tant congregation  i  in  Paris.  The  popish 
clergy,  therefore,  made  no  opposition  to 
them.  Indeed,  they  were  so  well  received 
at  court,  that  their  opposition  would  have 
been  vain.  The  Queen's  favorite  was  the 
sixth,  which  she  sung  to  a  fashionable  ditty 
tune.  The  Dauphin,  fond  of  hunting,  chose 
the  42d — "As  the  hart  panteth  for  the 
water-brooks."  Antony,  king  of  Navarre, 
sung,  "Avenge  me,  0  Lord,Gn  mine  ene- 
mies," &c. 

These  Psalms,  however,  soon  found  their 
way  to  persons  who  knew  how  to  use  them 
in  ways  more  congenial  with  their  intrinsic 
value.  The  intelligent  and  pious  christians 
of  Geneva  used  them  in  the  solemn  worship 
of  God.  Beza  translated  the  other  one 
hundred  Psalms  into  French  verse,  and  the 
whole  were  then  printed,  in  connexion  with 
the  Geneva  Catechism,  and  were  for  a  long 
time  popular  and  useful  in  celebrating  the 
praises  of<  iGrod,  botH  in  Switzerland  and  in 
France.     The  popish  plergy,  who   saw   no 


76  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

heresy  in  them  whil  3  they  were  only  sung 
for  amusement,  and  were  carelessly  hummed 
by  the  people,  in  their  sports  and  at  their 
work:  now,  when  they  came  into  use  in  the 
divine  worship,  denounced  them  as  full  of 
heresy.  And  to  wean  the  people  from  their 
attachment  to  them  and  divert  them  to  a 
substitute,  they  actually  put  forth  a  versifi- 
cation of  the  Odes  of  Horace,  a  heathen 
poet,  suited  to  the  same  fashionable  tunes, 
that  were  used  in  singing  Marot's  Psalms. 
But  the  trick  did  not  succeed. 

A  few  years  after  the  adoption  of  Marot's 
Psalms  in  the  churches  on  the  continent,  an 
English  version  was  made  by  the  joint  labors 
of  several  poets  of  the  day.  Thomas  Stern- 
hold,  John  Hopkins.  "Whytingham,  Norton, 
Robert  Wisdome,  and  some  others  contribu- 
ted to  this  work.  The  principal  part  of  it 
however,  was  done  by  the  two  first  men- 
tioned, and  the  version  is  known  by  their 
names.  Sternhold  was,  like  Marot,  a  court 
poet,  highly  favored  and  patronized  by  Hen- 
ry VIII,  and  afterwards  by  Edward  VI,  in 
whose  reign,  in  the  year  1548,  his  fifty-one 
Psalms  were  published.  He  held  the  office 
of  Groom  of  the  Ptobes  to  Henry.  Hop- 
kins was  a  clergyman.  He  versified  fifty- 
eight  of  the  Psalms.  Whytingham  was  also 
a  minister  and  a  Hebrew  scholar.  He  assis- 
ted Coverdale  in  the  translation  of  the  Bible 


OX  PSALMODY. 


into  English;  He  was  the  successor  of 
John  Knox,  in  the  pastorate  of  a  church  in 
Geneva,  and  was  afterwards  dean  of  Dur- 
ham, in  the  English  church;  a  man  of  learn- 
ing, strict  orthodoxy  and  irreproachable 
character.  He  versified  the  100th  and  119th 
Psalms.  He  also  wrote  some  hymns  and 
versified  the  Commandments  and  the  Creed. 
Norton  was  a  lawyer,  a  strict  Calvinist.  He 
translated  Calvin's  Institutes,  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  rei^n  of  Elizabeth.  Wisdome 
was  a  minister  of  the  English  church.  He 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  much  of  a 
poet;  he  versified  the  25th  of  the  collection. 
He  must  have  written  more,  for  an  English 
writer  introduces  a  precisian  as  saying — - 
"he  had  rather  hear  one  of  Robert  Wis- 
dome's  Psalms  than  the  best  hymn  that  a 
cherubim  can  sing.' L,  The  whole  collection 
was  finished  in  l&gi  and  published  in /dis- 
connexion with  theTPrayer  Book. 

The  age  of  Edward  VI  and  of  Elizabeth 
was  characterized  by  a  prevalent  passion 
for  Psalm  making  and  Psalm  singing.  The 
papists  had  no  religious  songs  for  the  peo- 
ple, and  their  other  songs  were  of  the  most 
lewd  and  immoral  character.  A  new  field 
of  literature  was  now  opened,  and  it  was 
entered  by  a  host  of  poets,  whose  produc- 
tions constituted  a  most  fashionable  species 
of  entertainment    for  all  classes  of  the  peo- 


78  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

pie,  who  were  glad  to  be  freed  from  the  vile 
trash  which  had  deluged  them.  Poets  that 
had  any  pretension  to  a  religious  character, 
were  ready  to  avail  themselves  of  the  favor- 
ing taste  of  the  times,  to  drive  into  merited 
oblivion  the  corrupting  songs  that  had,  un- 
der the  regime  of  the  bloody  Mary  and  the 
papacy,  polluted  the  public  morals.  Almost 
every  part  of  the  Bible  was  subjected 
to  the  rhyming  genius  of  the  age,  not  that 
it  might  be  sung,  but  that  it  might  wear  the 
attractive  form  demanded  by  the  prevailing 
taste,  and  receive  thereby  the  attention  of 
the  reading  public.  Hence  didactic  and 
historical  portions  of  the  Bible,  as  well  as 
the  poetic  and  lyric  portions,  were  duly 
turned  into  "Englysshe  metre." 

The  whole  Book  of  Psalms  was  versified 
.  by  Archbishop  Parker,  and  printed  in  1557, 
1  v  but  never  published.-.  '  Of  his  work  the  fol- 
lowing may  be  taken  as  a  fair  and  favorable 
specimen :  I  retain  the  peculiar  pointing  and 
the  old  orthography. 

To  f'eede  my  neede:  he  will  me  leade 

To  pastures  greeueand  fat: 
He  forth  brought  me :  in  libertie : 

To  waters  delicate. 

My  soul  and  hart :   he  did  convart, 

To  me  he  showth  the  path : 
Of  right  vvisness:  in  holiness, 

His  name  such  vertue  hath.  - 


. 


ON    PSALMODY.  79 


Yea  though  I  go:   through  death  his  wo 

His  vale  and  shadow  wyde:  . 
I  fear  no  dart:    with  me  thou  art 

With  rod  and  staffe  to  guide. 

A  version  of  some  of  them  was  made  by- 
Lord  Surry;  of  others,  by  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt, 
in  1549;  and  afterwards  a  number  of  them 
were  put  into  verse  by  King  James  I.  Wil- 
liam Hunnis,  a  poet  of  some  celebrity  in  the 
age  of  Edward  VI,  published  a  work  with 
the  following  title — "  Certayne  Psalmes  cho- 
sen out  of  the  Psalter  of  David,  and  drawen 
furth  into  Englyshe  metre,  by  William  Hun- 
nis,  1550."  There  was  considerable  point 
and  smoothness  in  his  style,  if  we  may  judge 
by  the  following,  which  was  in  bis  last  will 
and  testament.  What  will  not  men  put  into 
metre,  when  the  fashion  favors  ? 

"  To  God  my  soul  I  do  bequeathe, 

Because  it  is  oweir, 
My  body  to  be  layd  in  grave, 

Where  to  my  friends  best  known. 
Executors,  I  wyll  make  none, 

Thereby 'great  stryfFemay  growe, 
Because  the  goodes  that  I  shall  leave 

Wyll  not  pay  all  I  owe." 

Hunnis  published  many  pieces  in  metre. 
The  titles  of  some  of  them  are  in  the  quaint 
alliterative  style  that  was  popular  at  that 
period.  Such  are  "  Seven  sobs  of  a  sorrow- 
ing soul  for  sin:"    "A  handful  of  Honey- 


80  A    PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

suckles,"  containing  Blessings  out  of  Deu- 
teronomy, a  prayer  to  Christ,  &c.  in  metre. 
He  also  translated  the  whole  Book  of  Gene- 
sis into  English  rhyme,  and  the  work,  was 
entitled  a  Hive  full  of  Honey — "A  Hyve 
full  of  Hunnye.' 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  productions 
was,  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  rhyme. 
Its  author  was  a  remarkable  character, 
named  Christopher  Tye,  a  doctor  of  music, 
in  Cambridge.  He  employed  his  talents, 
both  as  a  poet  and  music  teacher,  in  putting 
into  rhyme  and  tune  a  historical  book.  Some 
of  the  music  of  Tye  is  admired  to  this  day. 
His  work,  designed  to  be  sung  in  the  royal 
chapel,  was  dedicated  uTo  the  vertuous  and 
godlye  learned  prynce  Edward  the  sixth," 
in  a  somewhat  protracted  effusion  of  the 
muse.  The  following  gives  a  sample  of  the 
poetry  of  the  times,  and  also  some  informa- 
tion of  the  extent  of  the  rhyming  propensity 
of  that  age : 

"Your  grace  may  note, from  time  to  time, 

That  some  doth  undertake 
Upon  the  Psalms  to  write  in  rhyme. 

The  verse  pleasant  to  make; 
And  some  doth  take  in  hand  to  write 

Out  of  the  Book  of  Kings, 
Because  they  see  your  grace  delight 

In  such  like  godly  things. 
And  last  of  all,  I,  your  poor  man, 

Whose  doings  are  full  base, 


ON    PSALMODY.  81 

Yet  glad  to  do  the  best  I  can, 

To  give  unto  your  grace, 
Have  thought  it  good  now  to  recite 

The  stories  of  the  Acts, 
Even  of  the  Twelve  as  Luke  doth  write, 

Of  all  their  worthy  facts." 

He  also  asserts  his  implicit  fidelity  to  the 
original,  which  seems  to  have  been  the  hon- 
est effort  of  all  the  rhyming  translators : 

"  Unto  the  text  I  do  not  add, 

Nor  nothing  take  away, 
And  tho'  my  style  is  gross  and  bad. 

The  truth  perceive  you  may." 

The  general  character  of  the  efforts  in 
poetry,  of  these  times,  is  plainness  and  sim- 
plicity. In  subsequent  times  it  has  often 
been  tried  to  modernize  the  old  productions, 
by  the  substitution  of  current  for  obsolete 
words,  by  divesting  them  of  their  antique 
forms  of  expression,  and  by  the  adoption  of 
our  orthography.  But  such  endeavors  have 
generally  proved  futile.  They  impart  a 
mixed  and  motely  character  to  the  works, 
which  lose  more  in  force  by  the  operation, 
than  they  gain  in  beauty.  Such  efforts  have 
been  made  more  than  once  on  Rouse's  ver- 
sion, and  have  generally  resulted  in  a  like 
failure.  Yet  these  failures  do  not  extin- 
guish the  desire  for  some  "improvement  of 
the  version  of  Psalms,''  nor  prevent  the 
repetition  of  the  efforts ;  nor  will  they,  until 


82  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

in  despair  of  success,  the  veneration  for 
antiquity  and  the  force  of  long  habit  and 
predilection  is  broken  through,  by  a  well 
directed  endeavor  to  make  an  entirely  new 
version.  There  are  few  stronger  prejudices 
than  those  which  are  built  upon  the  old  gray 
rocks  of  "  antiquity."  Indolence  and  habit 
are  their  two  flanking  towers.  That  a  thing 
has  been  long  used,  gives  it  a  strong  claim 
to  be  continued  in  use;  and  its  long  use  has 
rendered  it  easy,  easier  than  a  new  thing  of 
the  same  kind  can  be.  The  roughness  of 
style,  in  a  book,  is  not  noticed  by  one  who 
has  become  familiar  with  it.  By  use  and 
handling  it  seems  smooth  to  him,  while  the 
gentle,  easy  flow  of  thought,  in  a  book  of 
different  style,  is  mistaken  for  flatness  and 
insipidity.  He  misses  the  angular,  the 
inverted,  the  obscure  in  thought  and  expres- 
sion, as  a  man  might  miss  the  pungent 
seasoning  from  his  food. 

All  this,  as  has  been  illustrated  in  the  pro 
and  con  sentiments  of  christian  people,  in 
reference  to  Rouse's  version,  which  is  now 
over  two  hundred  years  old,  was  felt  in  ref- 
erence to  Sternhold's  when  it  was  less  than 
half  that  age.  Indeed,  the  parallel  is  so 
close,  in  several  respects,  between  the  con- 
troversy in  that  case  and  the  one  of  which 
I  am  writing,  that  I  cannot  forbear  to 
notice  it  further. 


OX    PSALMODY.  83" 

George  Wither,  a  poet  of  the  17th  cen- 
tury, turned  his  attention  to  the  versification 
of  the  Psalms.  He  claims  to  have  used  that 
"  simplicity  of  speech  that  best  becometh 
the  subject,"  and  to  have  as  naturally  and 
plainly  expressed  the  sense  of  Scripture  as 
most  tranlations  in  prose  have  done.  His 
"  Hymns  and  songs  of  the  church"  were 
published  in  1623,  by  licence  of  King  James 
I.  From  the  following  specimen,  taken 
from  the  first  Psalm,  he  appears  to  have 
been  as  good  a  poet  and  translator  w 
Sternhold  or  Rouse. 

'•Blest  is  the  man  who  neither  strays 
Where  the  godless  man  misguideth, 

Neither  stands  in  sinners'  ways, 
Nor  in  scorneiv  chair  abideth, 

But  in  God's  pure  law  delights, 

Thereon  musing  days  and  nights." 

But  good  George  Wither  found  people, 
in  his  day,  who  were  so  much  attached  to 
the  Psalms  of  Sternhold  and  Hopkins,  which 
had  been  in  use  less  than  a  hundred  years, 
that  they  would,  by  no  means,  allow  his 
version  to  be  sung.  Nay,  they  were  shocked 
at  his  presumption  in  attempting  a  version, 
after  Sternhold  and  Hopkins  had  made  one, 
some  seventy  odd  years  before.  And  with 
a  good  deal  of  spirit,  he  replies  to  those 
who  charged  bim  with  "  indecently  obtruding 
himself  upon  the  divine  calling" — 


84  A   PLEA   FOR   PEACE 

M I  wonder  what  *  divine  calling '  Hopkins  and  Stern- 
hold  had  more  than  I  have,  that  their  metrical  Psalms 
may  be  allowed  of  rather  than  my  Hymns!  Surely,  if* 
to  be  grooms  of  the  privy  chamber  were  sufficient  to 
qualify  the  n,  that  profession  that  I  am  of  (the  law)  may 
as  well  fit  me  for  what  I  have  undertaken. 

Wither  not  only  calls  in  question  the 
"divine  calling"  of  Sternhold  and  Hopkins, 
but  he  ventures,  as  some  have  done  with 
Rouse's,  to  make  some  criticisms  on  their 
performance.  With  great  modesty  and  can- 
dor, he  exonerates  himself  from  blame  in 
so  doing.     He  says— 

"  Excuse  me,  if  I  seem  a  little  too  plain  in  discovering 
the  faultiness  of  that  whereof  so  many  are  ovenceening ; 
for  I  do  it,  not  to  disparage  the  pious  endeavors  of  those 
who  took  pains  in  that  translation  ;  but  rather  commen- 
ding their  laborious  and  christian  intention,  do  acknowl- 
edge that  (considering  the  times  they  lived  in  and  of  what 
quality  they  were)  they  made  such  a  worthy  attempt  as 
may  justly  shame  us  who  come  after;  to  see  it  no  better 
seconded  during  all  the  flourishing  times  that  have  fol- 
lowed that  troublesome  age,  especially  seeing  how  curi- 
ously our  language  and  expression  are  refined  in  our 
trivial  discourses." 

There  is  excellent  good  sense  in  these 
observations.  Why  should  the  improve- 
ments in  language,  which  are  carefully  stud- 
ied and  highly  prized  in  our  '* trivial"  that 
is,  our  ordinary  discourses — our  sermon3, 
our  religious  treatises,  and  in  all  our  litera- 


02T   PSALMODY. 


ture — be  sedulously  excluded  from  our  songs 
of  praise  ?  To  have  versified  the  Psalms  in 
the  16th  or  I7th  century,  does  not  give  a 
person  any  better  claim  to  a  "  divine  calling," 
and  does  not  stamp  upon  his  work  a  "divine 
warrant,"  any  more  than  it  does,  to  have 
done  the  same  thing  in  the  19th  century. 
Nor  is  there  any  impropriety  in  trying  to 
improve  upon  a  former  effort  made  by  oth- 
ers :  their  work  was  performed  with  a  good 
intent,  and  with  good  success,  "  considering 
the  times  they  lived  in."  But  "it  may 
justly  shame  us  who  come  after,"  if  with 
means  and  opportunity  of  improving  upon 
it,  in  the  " language  and  expression,"  we 
refuse  to  do  it.  This  is  just  what  the  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  church  does,  in  reference  to 
Rouse's  version,  which  is  now  over  two  hun- 
dred years  old. 

During  these  two  hundred  years,  very 
great  changes  have  occurred  in  language 
and  the  style  of  expression.  And  it  is 
not  strange,  if  some  works  that  were  form- 
erly grave,  clear  and  respectable,  should 
have  contracted  such  an  air  of  quaintness 
and  obscurity,  as  to  be  neither  attractive 
nor  edifying.  There  is  a  fashion  in  litera- 
ture, as  well  as  in  dress.  And  the  impress 
of  fashion  is  more  observable  on  poetry  than 
on  prose,  because  it  is  more  susceptible  of 
the  gay  and  ornamental.     Hence  antique 


86  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

poetry  is  more  likely  than  prose  to  bene- 
glected,  as  difficult  to  understand,  or  to  be  rid- 
iculed, as  quaint  and  comical.  In  this  treat- 
ment our  versification  of  Psalms  has  shared, 
in  common  with  other  productions  of  the  sev- 
enteenth century.  The  sacredness  of  its 
themes,  and  the  frequent  beauty  and  -sim- 
plicity of  its  measures,  have,  aided  to  main- 
tain its  position  and  repute  in  the  church, 
although  they  have  not  been  able  to  protect 
its  many  faults  and  weaknesses  from  criti- 
cism. And  while,  by  the  concurring  verdicts 
of  parties  receiving  and  parties  rejecting 
this  version,  its  dress  and  air  are  not  ap- 
proximate to  the  divine  excellence, of  the 
original,  the  culpability  of  those  who  retain 
it  with  its  faults,  is  scarcely  less  than  that 
of  those  who  reject  it  for  its  faults. 

The  versifying  of  Psalms,  then,  was  com- 
mon in  the  reformation  period  of  the  church; 
and  the  use  of  paraphrases  and  hymns  was 
not  deemed  derogatory  to  the  inspired 
Psalter.  They  were  intended  not  to  super- 
cede, but  as  Withers  says,  "jto  keep  company 
with  David's  Psalms."  This  is  the  same 
idea  that  is  expressed  in  the  Act  of  the 
Associate  Reformed  Synod,  in  1793,  which 
censures  as  a  corruption  of  the  worship,  "the 
substitution  of  devotional  songs,  composed 
by  uninspired  men,  in  the  place  of  the  sa- 
cred songs  of  Scripture. '' 


--ON -PSALMODY.  87 


CHAPTER   X. 


PSALMODY    IN  THE  OLD  SCOTTISH    CHURCHES. 

The  doctrine,  that  it  is  wrong  to  sing 
in  the  praise  of  God  anything  except  the 
one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms  of  the  Old 
Testament,  was  never  held  by  the  church  of 
Scotland.  Neither  did  the  Secession  church 
in  Scotland  take  that  ground.  The  church 
of  Scotland  adopted  Rouse's  version  in  the 
year  1649,  after  it  had  been  under  consider- 
ation for  some  time.  In  1647,  in  the  18th 
Session  6f  the  Assembly,  an*  Act  was  passed 
for  examining  the  labors  of  Mr.  Zachary 
Boyd,  upon  the  other  scripture  songs;  which 
shows  that  the  church  of  Scotland,  at  that 
early  period,  even  while  they  had  Rouse's 
version  of  the  Psalms  under  consideration, 
contemplated  the  enlargement  of  their  Psal- 
mody. The  same  thing  was  contemplated 
and  attempted  by  the  Secession  church,  a 
hundred  years  later,  that  is,  immediately 
after  their  secession  from  the  established 
church.  The  truth  of  both  these  statements 
will  appear  from  the  testimonies -which,  I 
shall  shortly  give. 


88  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

I  am  aware  that  the  contrary  is  affirmed 
by  our  brethren,  who  desire  to  enlist  the 
testimony  of  the  Scottish  church  in  favor  of 
their  views.  And  for  this  purpose  they  lay 
great  stress  on  the  "deliverance"  of  the  As- 
sembly and  the  Act  of  Parliament,  which 
"ordain"  the  use  of  the  new  version, 
Rouse's,  and  "discharge  all  the  old  para- 
phrases" or  versions.  This  is  made  to  mean, 
that  the  church  of  Scotland  appointed 
these  Psalms  to  be  used,  to  the  exclusion  of 
every  thing  else,  in  the  praise  of  God.  If 
this  were  their  meaning,  why  did  they  take 
into  consideration  Mr.  Zachary  Boyd's  la- 
bors upon  the  other  scripture  songs?  No, 
it  is  not  their  meaning.  But  having  satis- 
fied themselves  of  the  excellence  of  the  new 
version  of  the  Psalms,  they  adopted  it,  and 
"ordained"  it  to  be  used  in  praising  God, 
so  far  as  the  Book  of  Psalms  was  concerned; 
but  they  still  designed  to  add  to  this,  metri- 
cal versions  of  the  "  other  songs  of  Scrip- 
ture." The  design  demonstates  their  views 
of  the  subject,  and  proves  conclusively  that 
they  had  very  different  views  from  those 
bretheren  in  this  country,  who  regard  the 
singing  even  of  scripture  songs,  besides 
the  Psalms  to  be  a  corruption  of  divine  wor- 
ship. Why  they  did  not  carry  out  their 
design,  I  have  not  the  means  of  knowing. 
Perhaps  the   labors  of  Mr.   Zachary   Boyd 


ON     PSALMODY. 


were  not  found  to  be  satisfactory.  From 
all  accounts  of  his  performance  in  the  de- 
partment of  versification,  I  do  not  wonder 
that  the  Assembly  declined  his  production. 
But,  I  repeat,  their  design  to  enlarge  their 
Psalmody  as  clearly  proves  their  belief  of 
its  propriety,  as  the  accomplishment  of  it 
would  have  done. 

And  it  was  a  design  which  the  church  of 
Scotland  did  not  relinquish,  for,  in  the  As- 
sembly of  1701,  Session  4th,  "The  scrip- 
ture songs  of  Mr.  Patrick  Sympson,  Minis- 
ter of  Renfrew,  are  recommended  to  be  used 
in  private  families,  and  in  order  to  prepare 
them  for  the  public  use  of  the  church." 
This  recommendation  was  renewed  by  the 
Assembly  in  1707.  And  by  the  loth  Act, 
of  April,  1708,  the  Commission  of  the 
Assembly  is 

''Instructed  and  appointed  to  consider  the  printed 
version  of  the  scripture  so  igs,"  (not  the  Psalms)  "with 
the  remarks  of  the  Presbyteries  thereupon,  and  after 
examination  thereof,  they  are  authorized  and  empow- 
ered to  conclude  and  emit  the  same,  for  the  public  use  of 
the  church;  the  present  version  of  the  Psalms"  (that  is 
Rouse's)  fi  having  been  ordered  in  the  same  manner,  m 
the  year  1649." 

These  statements  are  taken  from  Stewart 

of  Pardovan's  Collection  of  the  Acts  of  the 

church  of  Scotland.     And  they  fully  prove, 

that  no  such  notion  as  that  which  prevails 

C2 


90  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

in  the  Associate  Reformed  Synod  of  the 
West,  had  any  place  in  the  minds  of  those 
noble  and  godly  men.  It  is  nugatory  to 
attempt  to  evade  the  conclusion  drawn  from 
these  historical  facts.  And  it  is  also  useless 
to  refer  to  the  Act  of  Assembly  and  the 
Act  of  Parliament  of  1650,  ordaining  the 
new  "  paraphrase  of  the  Psalms,"  and  "  dis- 
charging," that  is,  prohibiting  the  old  para- 
phrase of  the  Psalms,  which  had  hitherto 
been  us^d;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  the 
warm  recommendation  of  Rouse's  version, 
by  Owen,  Manton  and  others,  for  these 
relate  only  to  the  Psalms,  and  not  to  the 
"other  scripture  songs,"  the  paraphrases  of 
which  were  yet  under  consideration,  and 
which  do  not  appear  to  hare  been  satisfac- 
torily finished,  until  the  year  1708,  as  has 
been  stated  above. 

But,  in  order  to  turn  the  point  of  this 
argument,  it  may  be  said,  much  more  ab- 
surd things  have  been  said  by  controver- 
sialists on  this  subject,  in  their  extremity— 
that  the  Scottish  church  was  a  corrupt  body, 
as  was  shown  by  the  necessity  for  secession 
from  it.  When  was  it  a  corrupt  body? 
Was  it  in  1647,  when  the  labors  of  Mr. 
Zachary  Boyd  on  the  "other  scripture 
songs"  were  examined  by  the  Assembly, 
with  reference  to  the  enlargement  of  the 
church's  Psalmody?     This  was  only  two  or 


OX    PSALMODY.  91 


three  years  anterior  to  the  time  that  Rouse's 
version  was  adopted;  it  was  in  the  very  era 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  Whether  it 
was  a  corrupt  body  in  1708,  or  whether  it  was 
not,  are  questions  that  have  no  pertinency 
on  this  subject.  The  corruption  of  the 
body  which,  in  1733-7,  rendered  the  se- 
cession of  the  Erskines,  in  their  judgment, 
necessary,  had  no  connexion  with  the  subject 
of  Psalmody.  It  is  well  known,  that  it  was 
nothing  in  the  mode  of  worship,  or  even  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  church,  that  occasioned 
the  secession;  but  matters  connected  with 
ecclesiastical  administration  by  corrupt  ju- 
dicatories. Indeed,  the  early  seceders  were 
careful  to  say,  that  they  did  not  separate 
from  the  church  but  from  a  corrupt  dominant 
party  in  it.  But  Psalmody  certainly  had 
no  connexion  with  that  separation, 

It  has  before  been  said,  that  the  original 
seceders  in  Scotland  did  not  hold  the  senti- 
ment that  has  unfortunately  crept  into  the 
Associate  Reformed  church.  Ralph  Ers- 
kine,  one  of  those  original  seceders,  will  be 
admitted  as  good  authority.  And  his  testi- 
mony, I  trust,  will  also  be  taken  as  to  the 
sound  condition  of  the  church  of  Scotland, 
when  she  undertook  to  enlarge  her  Psalm- 
ody.    Read  his  words  : 

"The  work  of  turning  all  the  rest  of  the  scripture  songs 
into  meter,  as  the  Psalms  of  David  are,  and  for  the  same 


92  A   PLEA   FOR    PEACE 


■public  use,  was  proposed  by  the  church  of  Scotland,  more 
than  one  hundred  years  ago,  and  that  in  one  of  the.  mesi 
noted  per ic As  of  reformation;  particularly  by  an  Act  of  As- 
sembly, August  28th,  1647."  [See  Er«kiae'<s  preface 
to  his  Scripture  Songs,  in  the  10th  volume  of  his  Works. 

But  this  is  not  all  that  we  learn  from 
Erskine.  He  says,  in  the  same  preface, 
that  he  was  recommended  publicly  by  the 
Associate  Presbytery,  in  1747,  to  versify 
the  other  "  scripture  songs,"  that  they  might 
be  sung  as  the  Psalms  of  David  were.  And 
this  great  and  godly  man,  one  of  the  origi- 
nal fathers  of  the  Secession  church,  under- 
took the  work  prescribed  to  him  by  the 
Associate  Presbytery  in  1747,  and  actually 
accomplished  the  greater  part  of  it.  That 
is,  he  turned  into  metre  the  poetical  portions 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments;  and  be- 
sides, wrote  a  large  number  of  Hymns, 
which  fall,  we  presume,  under  the  head  of 
"human  compositions."  Erskine's  attention 
was,  for  a  short  time,  and  the  church's 
attention  was,  for  a  long  time,  turned  away 
from  this  useful  design,  by  the  breaking  out 
of  the  unhappy  controversy  about  the  Bur- 
gess Oath,  which  eventually  divided  the 
body.  These  fruits  of  Erskine's  labors  may 
be  seen  in  the  10th  volume  of  his  Works. 

Erskine's  views  on  Psalmody,  which  coin- 
cided with  those  of  the  church  of  Scotland, 
in  one  of  her  "most  noted  periods  of  reform- 


ON    PSALMODY.  93 

ation"  and  also  with  those  of  the  Secession 
church,  in  the  days  of  her  primitive  purity 
and  integrity,  were  very  different  from  those 
■which  now  prevail  in  our  part  of  the  coun- 
try, among  the  churches  which  have,  by 
ecclesiastical  lineage,  descended  from  Fisher 
and  the  Erskines. 

Let  it  not  be  said,  that  he  was  merely 
exercising  his  poetical  talents,  as  men  do 
now-a-days,  for  the  recreation  or  edification 
of  readers,  with  no  design  of  having;  his 
verses  sung  in  the  worship  of  God,  for  he 
says — 

"As  the  poems  and  songs  here  written,  are  in  the 
form  of  what  is  called  rhyme  and  common  metre,  so 
the  reason  thereof  is,  to  answer  the  design  proposed  to 
me,  of  making  the  scripture  songs  adapted  to  the  com- 
mon tunes,  so  as  it  may  be  practicable  to  sing  them  as  ice 
do  the  Psalms  of  David."  [Defence  of  Rhyme  and  Metre 

It  appears  further,  that  Erskine  differed 
from  some  of  his  ecclesiastical  descendants, 
in  this  country,  not  only  on  the  subject  of 
"other  scripture  songs,"  but  also  in  relation 
to  paraphrases  and  imitations. 

"  If  more  seem  to  be  said,  upou  any  verse  in  this  song, 
than  is  directly  imported  in  it,  I  hope  it  will  be  reckoned 
no  great  fault,  it'  what  is  said  be  deducible  from  it.  or 
necessary  for  the  further  explication  of  it,  and  for  adap- 
ting this  paraphrase  upon  an  Old  Testanent  song  to  a 
Ne?v  Testament  dispensation."  [Pref.  to  Paraphrase  on 
the  Sons  of  Solomon. 


94  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

Should  the  reader  apprehend  from  this 
last  expression,  that  Ralph  Erskine  had  been 
unduly  familiar  with  Dr.  Watt's  views  of 
Psalmody,  as  set  forth  in  his  notorious 
aPreface,"  I  cannot  say  that  he  is  much 
mistaken.  The  name  of  Dr.  Watts,  I  am 
aware,  is  not  much  revered  or  loved  by  those 
whose  views  I  have  been  examining.  His 
Psalms  and  Hymns  are  believed  to  be  very 
bad  productions,  by  hundreds  of  good  peo- 
ple who  have  never  read  or  seen  them. 
And  his  Preface  to  them,  is  regarded  as 
little,  if  any,  short  of  blank  blasphemy. 
To  such  injustice  does  party  feeling  urge 
even  good  men,  when  chafed  and  heated  in 
sectarian  strifes.  And  how  refreshing  it  is, 
to  read  the  noble  ingenuous  testimony  of 
such  a  man  as  Erskine  to  the  excellency  of 
such  a  man  as  Watts.     He  says — 

"A  famous  and  religious  poet,  in  his  Preface  to  his 
excellent  Hymns  and  Spiritual  Songs,"  &c.  [Preface 
to  Paraphrase  of  Song  of  Solomon. 

It  appears  that  Erskine  not  only  read 
and  approved  of  Dr,  Watts'  Hymns,  but 
that  he  submitted  his  own  productions  to 
Dr.  Watts'  inspection;  for  he  says — 

u  The  iorementioned  eminent  poet,  by  whose  remarks, 
of  which  I  had  a  little  specimen,  perhaps  the  following 
sheets  had  been  better  polished  for  the  public,  had  his 
circumstances  allowed  a  more  close  and  full  review 
thereof." 


OX  PSALMODY.  95 


From  all  that  has  been  said  on  this  part 
of  the  subject,  there  is  ample  reason  for  the 
belief,  that  the  doctrine  in  the  church  of 
Scotland  and  in  the  Secession  church  was 
quite  opposite  to  that  of  the  Associate  Re- 
formed church,  and  quite  in  harmony  "with 
that  of  the  Presbyterian.  The  Editor  of 
Ralph  Erskine's  Works  states  the  correct 
doctrine  in  the  following  style : 

"  Though  the  Psalms  of  David  are  truly  excellent  and 
sublime,  containing  suitable  matter  for  praise  and  ado- 
ration, &c.  yet  there  are  many  passages  in  them  pecu- 
liarly adapted  to  the  old  dispensation  of  carnal  rites  and 
ceremonies,  and.  on  that  account,  cannot  be  supposed  to 
be  so  clear  and  full  of  the  grace  and  spirit  of  the  gospel. 
The  consideration  hereof  hath  induced  many  devout 
and  piously  disposed  persons,  ardently  and  sincerely  to 
wish  that  our  Psalmody  were  enlarged,  not  only  by  ad- 
ding some  other  scripture  songs  out  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, but  particularly  by  selecting  a  number  from  the 
New." 

I  might  leave  these  historical  statements, 
without  a  word  of  comment  or  application. 
They  must  make  hnpressionns  on  every  can- 
did mind  favorable  to  the  views  expressed  in 
the  former  part  of  this  treatise.  It  is  re- 
markable that  these  pointed  expressions  in 
a  favorite  author  should  not  have  fallen 
under  the  eye  of  previous  writers  on  the 
subject  of  Psalmody.  The  churches  which 
sing  the  old  version    often  speak  of  their 


96  A    PLEA   FOR   PEACE 

views  as  harmonizing  with  those  of  the  Scot- 
tish people.  But  certainly  the  Scottish 
people,  in  the  days  of  the  Erskines,  did  not 
harmonize  with  them,  on  the  subject  of 
"other  scripture  songs."  There  is  a  much 
plainer  and  stronger  resemblance  between 
the  views  of  the  Erskine  period  and  those- 
of  the  Presbyterian  church. 


CHAPTER    XL 


ARGUMENT  FOR  THE  USE  OF  S0XGS  OF 
PRAISE,  FROM  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE 
ASSOCIATE  REFORMED  CHURCH. 
The  doctrine  prevalent  in  a  church,  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  standards  of  a  church, 
are  not  always  the  same  thing.  This  is  but 
saying  that  a  belief  may  become  common  in 
a  church,  which,  is  at  variance  with  its  ac- 
credited public  confession.  Instances  of 
this  are  too  abundant  and  well  known,  to 
require  specifications.  The  same  general 
remark  applies  to  practices  in  the  church, 
particularly  those  that  are  connected  with 
public  worship.  Both  these  statements  are 
true  of  the  Associate  Reformed  church,  in 
relation  to  Psalmody.     Neither  the  general 


ON  PSALMODY.  97 

belief  nor  the  universal  practice,  in  the 
West,  are  supported  by  the  standards  of  the 
body.  Now,  as  we  are  not  obliged  to  esti- 
mate our  orthodoxy  by  the  conformity  of 
our  sentiments  to  those  of  others — measu- 
ring ourselves  by  ourselves — as  our  neighbor, 
«or  our  minister,  or  any  prominent  member 
in  the  church,  is  neither  the  exponent  nor 
the  pattern  of  our  belief,  we  are  clearly 
bound  to  look  for  the  real  doctrines  of  the 
church,  in  the  authorized  standards  of  the 
church.  Well,  what  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Associate  Reformed  church,  on  Psalmody? 
It  is  expressed  in  the  following  words  of  the 
Directory : 

"It  is  the  Will  of.Gud,  that  the  sacred  songs  con- 
tained in  the  Book  of  Psalms,  be  sung  in  his  worship. 
jotli  public  and  private,  to  the  end  of  the  world:;  and 
the  rich  variety  and  perfect  purity  of  their  matter,  the 
blessing  of  God  upon  them  in  every  age,  and  the  edifi- 
cation of  the  church  thence  arising,  set  the  propriety  o* 
singing  them  in  a  convincing  light :  nor  shall  any  com- 
posures merely  human  be  sung  in  any  of  the  Associate 
Reformed  churches.''     [Book  3,  Ch.  2,  Sec.  3. 

On  the  first  and  principal  part  of  this 
article,  there  is  entire  unanimity  in  the 
church;:  all  agree  that  it  is  right  to  sing  the 
sacred  songs  contained  in  the  Book  of 
Psalms.  But  the  article  does  not  exclude 
or  prohibit  other  scripture  songs,  besides  the 
Psalms ;  and  therefore,  the  prevailing  belief 
C3 


A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 


which  does  so,  is  astray  from  the  Directory 
and  unsupported  by  it.  But  on  the  clause 
about  human  composures,  there  always  has 
been,  and  is  now  great  diversity  of  senti- 
ment, in  our  church.  Many  have  under- 
stood it  to  be  intended  as  a  rule  for  regula- 
ting the  singing  in  our  own  congregations, 
and  not  to  be  binding  on  our  ministers  or 
our  people  when  worshipping  in  churches  of 
other  denominations.  But  whether  this  was 
the  intention  of  the  framers  of  the  Direc- 
tory or  not,  it  is  very  certain  that  the  clause 
referred  to,  does  not  exclude  from  our  use 
the  other  scripture  songs  of  praise;  and  our 
brethren,  in  making  that  exclusion,  can  give 
no  higher  authority  for  it,  than  the  "  com- 
mandments of  men"  of  very  recent  times. 
Surely,  the  Song  of  Solomon  is  not  a 
•'composure  merely  human;"  the  lofty 
strains  of  the  evangelical  prophet  are  not 
human  composures ;  the  songs  of  praise 
in  the  Apocalypse  are  not  human  compo- 
sures. Why,  then,  are  we  prohibited  from 
using  them  in  the  offering  of  praise  ?  Our 
standards  do  not  forbid  it,  but  our  brethren 
do. 

Our  present  standards,  containing  the 
above  clause,  were  adopted  in  the  year 
1799.  It  is  important  to  note,  that  this 
ambiguous  clause  about  "  composures  merely 
human,"  was  introduced  as  a  compromise  <w 


ON     PSALMODY.  99 

conflicting  views.  The  original  "  Draught 
of  an  Overture  for  the  Government,  Wor- 
ship and  Discipline  of  the  Associate  Re- 
formed Church''  was  printed  1796,  and 
after  receiving  a  sort  of  general  sanction  by 
Synod,  was  sent  down  to  Presbyteries  for 
their  examination  and  judgment.  The  ar- 
ticle in  this  original  Draft,  shows  that  it  was 
never  the  thought  or  intention  of  the  fra- 
mers  of  our  Directory  to  restrict  the  church, 
in  its  praises,  to  the  Book  of  Psalms.  The 
article  is  as  follows  : 

u  It  is  the  will  of  God,  that  the  sacred  songs  contained 
in  the  Book  of  Psalms  be  sung  in  his  worship  to  the  end 
of  the  world :  besides  which  other  songs  of  scripture  may 
be  added  to  the  system  of  Psalmody,  as  the  judicatories  oi 
the  church  shall  find  for  edification;  and  the  rich  varietv 
and  perfect  purity  of  their  matter,"  &c. 

The    next  article  in    the  same   original 
Draft  says — 

"  The  substitution  of  devotional  songs  by  uninspired 
men,  in  the  room  of  the  scripture  Psalmody,  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  the  Book  of  Psalms  or  any  part  thereof  are 
unfit  for  New  Testament  worship,  is  a  grievous  corrup- 
tion of  the  worship  of  God,  and  is  therefore  utterly  pro- 
hibited in  all  the  Associate  Reformed  churches." 

In  the  former  article,  the  use  of  the  other 
songs  of  scripture  is  allowed  and  commend- 
ed; for  the  concluding  expressions,  "the 
rich  variety/'  &c.  are  equally  applied  to  the 
Psalms  and  to  other  scripture  songs.     The 


100  A    PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

first  part  of  the  former  article  and  the  whole1 
of  the  latter  are  opposed  to  those  who  say 
that  the  Psalms  are  not  fit  for  New  Testa- 
ment worship;  but  they  do  not  teach  that 
the  Psalms  alone  are  fit.  The  doctrine  of 
these  articles  is  not,  that  the  use  of  other 
sacred  songs,  in  addition  to  the  Psalms^  Si 
a  corruption  of  worship,  but  that  the  substi- 
tution  of  others  in  the  room  of  the  Psalms  ife 
a  corruption.  It  was  left  for  our  brethren 
of  recent  times,  to  find  out  that  is  like  the 
sin  of  Nadab  and  Abihu,  to  sing  anything 
besides  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms. 

Although  this  original  Draft  was  not 
finally  adopted  as  a  part  of  our  standards, 
yet  the  fact  that  it  was,  by  the  Synod,  sent 
down  to  the  Presbyteries  for  their  judgment, 
shows  what  was  the  prevalent  feeling  of  the 
church  at  the  time.  I  have  said  that  the 
clause  in  our  standards,  "nor  shall  any 
composures  merely  human,"  &c.  was  intro- 
duced by  compromise.  This  cannot  be 
made  clear  in  any  way  so  well  as  by  a 
contemporaneous  letter  from  a  prominent 
member  of  Synod.  We  have  seen  what  the 
original  Draft  was,  and  we  know  what  was 
actually  adopted  and  is  in  the  standards  of 
the  church ,  now,  what  was  tne  occasion  and 
manner  of  making  the  change? 

The  following  extract  of  a  letter  from  Dr. 
J..  M.  Mason  to  Dr.  A.  Proudfit  show  thisy 


ON   PSALMODY.  101 

and  it  shows  a  good  deal  more;  it  lets  us 
know  what  were  his  views  of  the  subject 
and  his  anticipations  in  relation  to  it.  It  is 
dated,  "New  York,  Sept.  6,  1797,"  while 
the  original  draft  was  before  the  Presbyte- 
ries. 

"  By  a  letter  from  Mr.  Hemphill,  which  is  next  to  of- 
ficial from  the  Presbytery  of  South  Carolina,  I  am  in 
formed  that  the  clause  about  adding  other  scripture 
songs  to  the  compilation  of  Psalmody  will,  if  persisted 
in,  hinder  the  reception  of  the  Directory  in  that  Pres- 
Irytery.  He  says  that  neither  he  nor  his  brethren  wish 
to  dictate  to  us  on  that  subject,  that  they  are  willing  we 
should  cherish  our  own  views,  but  cannot  consent  to  admit 
as  a  term  of  communiun  for  themselves,  a  principle  of 
the  correctness  of  which  they  are  not  satisfied;  and 
that  if  we  will  drop  the  phrase,  ^'besides  which  other 
scripture  songs  may  be  added,''  &c,  and  alter  the  con- 
cluding one  thus,  *  Nor  shall  any  Psalms  of  mere  human 
composition  be  added,1  or  something  similar,  they  will 
not  ask  the  insertion  of  any  claus-e  rejecting-  the  principle  we 
have  established;  and  every  thing  will  go  smoothe  and 
easy." 

"I  have  received  the  judgment  of  the  First  Presbyte 
ry  of  Pennsylvania,  and  of  the  Presbytery  of  New  York 
bojth  of  which  unanimously  are,  that  it  is  best  for  the 
peace  and  edification  of  the  church,  to  accede  to  the  pro 
posal.  I  wish  you  to  procure  the  sentiments  of  your 
Presbytery  without  delay,  and  let  me  know,  as  the  work 
will  be  printed  off  before  the  meeting  of  Synod.  There 
is  a  powerful  reason,  in  my  judgment,  for  agreeing  to 
^he  alteration.  As  the  clause  now  "  (that  is,  in  the  origi- 
nal Draft  )  "  recognizes  the  -principle  of  scriptural  Psal- 
C3* 


102  A    PLEA    FOR  PEACE 

mody.  it  is  so  restricted  as  to  be  in  fact  useless:  we  are 
tied  dawn  to  other  songs  of  scripture  literally  versified.  By 
erasing  the  clause  we  get  rid  of  the  restriction,  and 
should  the  Lord  prepare  the  churches,  at  some  future 
period,  for  an  enlarged  system  of  Psalmody,  they  will  be 
able  to  apply  the  principle  in  a  more  liberal  and  effec- 
tive manner  than  is  possible  nnder  the  existing  provi- 
sion." 

From  these  statements  it  is  perfectly  evi- 
dent, that  the  much  discussed  clause  in  our 
Directory,  "nor  shall  any  composures 
merely  human,"  fcc.  was  adopted  by  the 
framers  of  our  standards,  on  the  principle 
of  compromise;  and  that  it  was  adopted 
with  the  understanding  and  avowal  that  it 
was  less  restricted  in  its  meaning  than  the 
clause  in  the  original  Draft,  which  it  super- 
ceded. Even  the  brethren  in  Carolina  did 
not  ask  the  insertion  of  anything  that  would 
reject  the  principle  of  a  Psalmody  more 
extended  than  the  Book  of  Psalms.  They 
were  not  "  fully  satisfied  "  of  the  correctness 
of  that  principle,  but  as  the  rest  of  the 
church  was  fully  satisfied  of  it,  they  would 
not  dictate,  but  they  would  propose  a  differ- 
ent phrase,  and  this  proposal  the  rest  of 
the  church,  for  peace  and  edification,  acced- 
ed to. 

I  now  invite  the  reader's  attention  to 
other  periods  of  the  history  of  the  Associate 
Reformed  Church:  and  whether  we  take  a 


EST   PSALMODY.  108 

view  of  the  period  anterior,  or  of  that  subse- 
quent to  1799,  we  will  discover  a  perpetual 
diversity  of  sentiment  on  the  subject  of 
psalmoclv.  Take  the  earlier  period.  Our 
church  was  formed  in  1782.  Four  years 
afterwards,  in  1786,  the  version  of  Tate  & 
Brady,  the  Episcopal  Psalmody,  was  used  in 
the  Associate  Reformed  Church,  in  Boston. 
The  Synod,  in  the  latter  year,  disapproved 
of  this  as  an  innovation.  But,  that  this  did 
not  settle  the  matter,  or  show  an  entire  unifor- 
mity of  sentiment,  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  the  synod,  next  year,  that  is,  in  1787,  ap- 
pointed a  committee  to  prepare  and  publish  an 
overture  for  the  illustration  of  the  doctrines  of 
our  Confession,  in  which  the  subject  of  psal- 
mody was  formally  introduced.  This  publi- 
cation was  issued  before  the  next  meeting  in 
1788.  It  was  called  up  at  this  meeting,  but 
it  was,  on  motion,  resolved,  that  the  consid- 
eration of  it  be  postponed  till  the  next  year, 
and  that  the  members  be  all  warmly  solicited 
to  attend,  and  that  they  be  fully  prepared 
to  examine  it  with  candor  and  impartiality. 
(Minutes  of  1788.) 

At  this  same  meeting,  in  view  of  the  diffi- 
culties in  Rev.  D.  Annan's  congregation,  on 
the  subject  of  psalmody,  it  was, 

"Resolved.  That  the  members  of  Synod  be  solicited 
to  make  themselves  acquainted  with  Watts'  version,  and 
Brady's  version,  and  any  other  version  now  used  by  any 


104  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

of  the  Reformed  Churches,  that  they  may  be  prepared 
to  speak  on  the  subject  at  the  meeting  of  the  Synod 
sext  year.  And  further  agreed  to  recommend  it  to  Mr. 
D.  Annan  and  his  .session,  to  use  as  formerly,  the  Scots 
version."— (Minutes  of  1788,  pp.  59.  60.) 

Notwithstanding  this  urgent  appeal  to 
the  members  of  Synod,  when  they  came 
together  next  year,  1789,  they  had  not  made 
up  their  minds  on  the  subject  of  psalmody, 
and  all  they  did  was  to  refer  the  considera- 
tion of  the  overture,  in  which  it  was  treated 
of,  to  the  presbyteries.  The  next  year, 
1790,  after  it  had  been  published  three 
years,  after  it  had  been  before  two  meetings 
of  the  Synod,  and  one  year  in  the  consider- 
ation of  Presbyteries,  the  Synod  of  the  As- 
sociate Reformed  Church  recommended  the 
overture  "as  being  in  substance  an  excellent 
and  instructive  exhibition  of  their  views  of 
the  confession." 

Let  the  reader  now  attentively  read  the 
following  sentences  of  this  overture,  ap- 
proved by  the  Synod  after  three  years  con- 
sideration: 

"We  are  not  afraid  to  assert  and  vindicate  the  propri- 
ety of  using  the  Fsalms  and  songs  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  the  praise  of  God."  "We  are  extremely  sorry  Jo 
observe  a  growing  disrelish,  in  some  churches,  for  the 
Psalms  of  David,  and  other  songs  of  Scripture.  We 
could  wish  for  a  more  finished  and  poetical  version  of 
these  than  any  yet  given  to  the  churches.  And  we  do 
not  mean  to  say,  that  hymns  of  human  compositions  may  not 


ON  PSALMODY.  105 

be  lawfully  used  in  any  case  whatsoever.     But  we  think 
it  safest  generally,  to  adhere  to  a  Scriptural  Psalmody. '' 

Now  what  have  we  here  ?  The  doctrine 
of  our  modern  champions  of  psalmody? 
The  doctrine,  that  to  sing  anything  beside 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms  is  a  cor- 
ruption of  worship?  No,  nothing  of  the  kind. 
But  we  have  the  doctrine  of  the  church  in 
1797,  and  that  of  our  directory  in  1799,  viz. 
that  the  Psalms  of  the  Bible  are  proper  to 
be  sung,  and  that  other  scriptural  songs 
may  be  sung  too.  In  the  overture,  the 
ground  is  taken  strongly  for  the  Psalms  of 
David,  which  there  was  a  disposition,  in; 
some  quarters,  to  oppose.  Indeed  the  action 
of  the  church,  both  in  the  overture  here  re- 
ferred to,  and  in  the  original  and  ultimate 
drafts  of  the  Directory,  was  all  defensive  of 
the  Psalms,  intended  to  teach  that  the  Old 
Testament  Psalms  were  fit  to  be  sung,  I 
only  remark,  further,  in  reference  to  this 
period  and  the  sentiments  that  prevailed  in 
it,  that  the  growing  disrelish  which  our 
fathers  observed  with  extreme  sorrow,  has 
come  to  a  still  greater  magnitude  in  our 
times;  for  our  brethren  not  only  disrelish, 
but  utterly  repudiate  from  their  psalmody, 
those  "songs  of  Scripture,"  to  which  our 
fathers  refer. 

Were  we  to  examine,  in  like  manner,  the 
period  posterior  to  the  adoption*  of  our  stand- 


jL06  A    PLEA    FOR    PEACE 


;ards  in  1799,  we  should  find  that  a  similar 
diversity  of  opinion  prevailed  on  the  sub- 
ject of  psalmocty.  At  different  periods,  the 
church  has  been  agitated  with  discussions 
and  debates  upon  it.  Synods  have  differed 
about  it,  and  individuals  have  done  the  same. 
They  have  never  differed  about  the  pro- 
priety of  singing  the  Scripture  Psalms,  but 
they  have  never  agreed  in  denying  the  pro- 
priety of  singing  others.  I  do  not  ask  the 
reader,  however,  to  go  into  this  historical 
review,  yet  I  cannot  forbear  to  state  one 
fact,  as  it  shows  how  unsettled  was  the  state 
of  the  church  on  this  subject,  and  how  little 
some  knew  of  their  own  minds:  In  1802,  the 
Synod  was  [applied  to,  by  the  Presbytery 
of  the  Carolinas,  to  know  the  meaning  of 
the  expression,  "composures  merely  human, " 
a  phrase  which  they  themselves  suggested  as 
satisfactory  to  them,  and  which,  in  accomr 
modation  to  their  views,  had  been  adopted 
in  our  directory,  only  three  years  before! 

With  respect  to  the  versification,  in  use 
in  our  church,  there  has  been  always  a  de- 
sire, cherished  and  expressed  by  many,  for 
its  improvement.  That  it  needs  improve- 
ment, has  been  denied  by  few.  The  highest 
judicatories  of  the  church  have,  several 
times,  undertaken  it.  In  former  times,  I 
mention  it  simply  as  a  historical  fact,  and 
with  no  invidious  purpose,  there  was  a  dis- 


. 


ON     PSALMODY.  107 

position  in  the  Associate  Church,  or  at  least 
with  some  of  its  members,  to  lay  hold  of  any 
such  measure,  or  proposal  even,  and  turn  it 
to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Associate 
Reformed  Church,  by  glowing  appeals  to  the 
fears  of  those  who  are  wont  to  regard  all 
changes  as  identical  with  defections.  To 
exonerate  themselves  from  blame,  the  Synod, 
in  1801,  addressed  the  Presbytery  of  the 
Carolinas  in  the  following  words: 

"It  is  hoped  that  neither  you,  nor  those  under  your 
inspection,  will  be  discouraged  by  difficulties,  or  sha- 
ken by  the  many  false  reports,  which  have  been  and 
are  still  circulating  to  the  prejudice  of  the  Synod, 
such  as  their  using  or  proposing  a  new  system  of 
psalmody,  or  their  authorizing  families  or  churches 
under,  their  inspection  to  do  so.'? 

Still  the  false  reports  and  fears,  within  or 
without  the  church,  did  not  extinguish  the 
desire  or  paralyze  the  efforts  to  obtain  an 
improved  version  of  the  psalms.  And  in 
1810,  the  General  Synod  unanimously  re- 
solved to  undertake  the  matter  of  procuring 
one.  But,  lo!  the  next  year,  the  Synod  of 
the  Carolinas  and  Georgia,  in  their  re- 
port represent  that  many  of  their  people 
"were  greatly  alarmed  at  General  Synod's 
proposal  of  a  new  version  of  psalmody/' 
Whether  this  news  greatly  alarmed  the 
General  Synod  or  not,  it  is  certain  that  the 
undertaking  fell  through,  and  the  new  ver- 


108  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

rsion,  notwithstanding  half  a  score  of  efforts 
since,  is  still  a  desideratum,  with  no  great 
•prospect  of  its  being  supplied,  to  alarm  any 
(body. 

There  is  abundant  evidence,  both  in- 
ternal and  external,  that  the  object  of  the 
fathers  of  the  Associate  Reformed  Church 
was,  to  oppose  the  sentiment  which  Dr. 
Watts  was  understood  to  have  advanced, 
viz,  That  some  of  the  Psalms  of  David  are 
unfit  to  be  sung  in  the  New  Testament 
Church.  It  was  this,  and  not  the  addition 
of  hymns,  that  gave  offence.  It  was  the 
substitution  of  his  "imitations"  of  the  psalms, 
in  the  room  of  the  Psalms,  and  not  the  use 
of  hymns,  that  was  the  ground  of  complaint. 
Had  Dr.  Watts  given  a  fair  and  close  version 
of  all  the  Psalms,  and  annexed  his  hymns 
and  paraphrases,  and  suppressed  some  ex- 
pressions in  his  preface,  I  verily  believe  that 
the  book  would  have  met  with  little  opposi- 
tion from  any  quarter;  for  it  would  have  ac- 
corded with  the  acknowledged  wants,  and 
express  wishes  of  the  church.  It  would 
have  been  a  near  approximation  to  what  the 
church  of  Scotland  attempted  in  one  of  her 
"most  noted  periods  of  reformation,"  and 
what  the  secession  church  desired  in  the 
"days  of  Fisher  and  the  Erskines."  But  the 
preface,  the  fatal  omission  of  some  of  the 
psalms,   and  the  very  loose  paraphrases  of 


ON    PSALMODY.  109 

others,  excited  alarm;  and  that  alarm  has 
ultimately  driven  a  portion  of  the  church  to 
assume  an  anomalous  and  unscriptural  posi- 
tion, in  opposition  to  every  hymn  and  song 
of  praise,  inspired  and  uninspired  alike,  ex- 
cept the  one  hundred  and  fifty  psalms. 

But  this  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the  stand- 
ards of  the  church,  whether  historically  or 
scripturally  interpreted.  The  standards  ra- 
ther teach  that  it  is  right  to  sing  other 
scripture  songs.  If,  therefore,  any  congre- 
gation desired  to  use  paraphrases  or  versifi- 
cations  of  Scripture  which  express  praise  to 
God,  there  is  nothing  in  the  church  stand- 
ards to  prevent.  Or  if  individual  members 
or  ministers  worshipping  in  the  churches  of 
other  denominations,  choose  to  join  in  prais- 
ing God  in  an  orthodox  and  spiritual  song, 
they  do  not  expose  themselves  to  legitimate 
censure  by  so  doing,  To  debar  the  people 
from  this  privilege  is  spiritual  tyranny,  con- 
trary to  the  spirit  and  design  of  our  author- 
ized church  standards.  And  it  is  not  less 
contrary  to  the  spirit  and  law  of  God's 
word. 

These  remarks  may  perhaps  suggest  to 
the  reader  the  enquiry — Whether,  for  such  a 
cause,  members  are  ever  brought  under 
discipline.  To  gratify  the  curiosity  that 
prompts  the  enquiry,  I  will  state  that  the 
cases  are  not  very  many,  but  they  do  occur 
Dt 


110  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

sometimes.  Only  two  instances  have  oc- 
curred within  the  sphere  of  my  own  observa- 
tion. I  refer  to  them,  both  as  perversions  of 
the  ordinance  of  church  discipline,  and  also 
as  illustrations  of  the  little  practical  use 
that  we  make  of  the  important  speculative 
distinction  which  our  own  writers  on  Psalm- 
ody are  careful  to  assure  the  public  that  we 
maintain — the  distinction  between  good  ver- 
sions and  hymns.  It  is  always  said,  and 
that  very  earnestly  and  conspicuously,  that 
our  contest  with  Presbyterians  is  not  about 
versions ;  we  do  not  contend  for  a  particular 
version;  we  want  the  best  version;  give  us 
a  better  version  than  we  have  and  we  are 
ready  to  receive  it,  &c.  &c.  I  have  noticed 
this  matter,  in  a  former  part  of  this  work, 
but  I  am  led  by  the  subject  to  revert  to  it, 
and  to  the  cases  alluded  to,  which  illustrate 
the  degree  of  importance  which  is  attached  to 
it,  in  the  estimation  of  some  of  our  brethren. 
/  One  of  the  cases  was  as  follows:  An  El- 
der in  one  of  our  churches,  spending  the 
night  with  a  Presbyterian  friend,  at  family 
worship  united  with  the  household  in  singing 
the  following  verses  of  the  92nd  Psalm, 
long  metre : 

''Sweet  is  the  work,  my  God,  my  king, 
j/>  To  praise  thy  name,  give  thanks  and  sing. 

\    '        To  show  thy  love  by  morning  light, 
*\^  And  talk  of  all  thy  truths  at  night. 


ON    PSALMODY.  Ill 

2.  Sweet  is  the  day  of  sacred  rest; 
No  mortal  care  shall  seize  my  breast; 
04!  may  my  heart  in  tune  be  found, 
Like  David's  harp  of  solemn  sound.'' 

For  this  offence,  the  man  was  censured 
and  suspended  by  the  Session,  and  upon 
appealing,  by  the  Presbytery.  He  then 
appealed  to  the  Synod,  but  being  unable  to 
attend  the  meeting,  accompanied  his  appeal 
with  a  request  that  the  Synod  would  defer 
action  on  it  till  the  next  year.  But  action 
was  not  deferred,  the  sentence  of  the  lower 
courts  was  affirmed,  and  the  man  was  thrown 
out  of  the  communion  of  the  Associate 
^Reformed  churchTin  which  he  had  been  a 
Ruling  Elder,  in  good  and  regular  standing. 

JNow,  as  to  the  "question  about  versions:" 
here  is  the  Scottish  version,  which  may  be 
compared  with  the  above  one  of  Watts : 

"To  render  thanks  unto  the  Lord 

It  is  a  comely  thing, 
And  to  thy  name,  O  thou  most  high, 

Due  praise  aloud  to  sing : 

2.  Thy  loving  kindness  to  show  forth 

When  shines  the  morning  light, 
And  to  declare  thy  faithfulness 
With  pleasure  every  night 

3.  On  a  ten  stringed  instrument, 

Upon  the  Psaltery ; 
And  on  the  harp  with  solemn  sound 
And  iU'ave  sweet  melodv." 


112  A   PLEA    FOR    PEACE 

For  the  convenience  of  the  reader,  making 
a  comparison  of  the  two  versions,  I  subjoin 
the  prose  version. 

"  It  is  a  good  thing  to  give  thanks  unto  the  Lord,  and  t° 
sing  praises  unto  thy  name,  0  Most  High : 

2.  To  show  forth  thy  loving  kindness  in  the  morning, 
and  thy  faithfulness  every  night. 

3.  Upon  an  instrument  of  ten  strings,  and  upon  the 
psaltery:  upon  the  harp  with  solemn  sound." 

Now,  upon  fair  comparison,  it  appears 
that  Watts'  version  is  as  good  as  House's, 
of  the  first  two  verses  in  the  prose.  Watts' 
second  verse  is  not  a  close  version;  but  it 
expresses  truthful  and  devout  sentiments, 
which  the  author,  no  doubt,  thought  were 
implied  in  the  allusions  to  the  temple  wor- 
ship. And  in  singing  them,  a  devout  wor-" 
shipper  may  do  no  more  than  is  allowed, 
nay,  enjoined  in  the  Directory  of  the  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  church,  "in  singing  those 
parts  of  them  [the  Psalms]  which  are  ex- 
pressed in  the  ceremonial  style,  or  describe 
the  circumstances  of  the  writers,  or  of  the 
church  in  ancient  times,  we  should  have  our 
eye  upon  the  general  principles  which  are 
implied  in  them,  and  which  are  applicable 
to  individuals  or  to  the  church  in  every 
age."     [Book  3,  Ch.  3,  Sec.  3. 

If  it  should  be  said  that  there  are  words 
in  Watts'  which  are  not  in  the  prose,  it  is 
admitted.     And  so   there  are  in  Rouse's; 


ON    PSALMODY.  113 


for  it  has  been  shown  before,  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  prose  to  correspond  to  that 
sweet  and  graphic  line,  so  descriptive  of 
what  church  music  should  be — "  grave, 
sweet  melody." 

The  other  case  did  not  end  so  unhappily, 
in  the  exclusion  of  a  person  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  church.  Indeed,  it  was 
rather  comical  than  tragical,  throughout. 
A  young  minister,  preaching  in  a  Presbyte- 
rian church,  gave  out  for  singing  the  100th 
Psalm,  long  metre;  that  is,  one  of  Watts' 
Psalms.  Whether  it  was  from  embarrass- 
ment, or  forgetfulness,  or  practical  views  of 
the  "question  of  versions,"  or  indifference, 
I  do  not  know.  But  so  it  was;  and  the 
Psalm  was  sung  by  the  congregation,  with- 
out their  knowing  that  any  wrong  had  been 
done.  Some  gossip,  however,  treasured  up 
this  part  of  the  service  for  future  use;  and 
on  the  earliest  opportunity,,  one  of  the 
watchful  guardians  of  orthodoxy  and  order 
solemnly  spread  the  case  before  the  Presby- 
tery, and  proposed  something  like  a  censure 
on  the  young  brother — a  mild  one,  it  is  true 
— just  enough  to  make  him  think  he  had 
done  something  wrong. 

Well  here  again,  in  the  discussion,  the 
"question  of  versions"  came  fairly  up,  and 
the  important  speculative  distinction  was 
again  fairly  dodged  in  practice.     One  of  the 


114  A   PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

members  called  attention  to  that  distinction 
by  saying,  with  more  diversion  to  himself, 
probably,  than  to  his  brethren,  "I  am 
scarcely  prepared  to  vote  for  this  resolution. 
We  have  the  highest  personal  authority  in  the 
church  for  saying  that  our  controversy  with 
Presbyterians  is  not  about  versions.  I  am 
not  able,  at  this  moment,  to  say  whether 
the  100th  Psalm  of  Watts  is  a  good  version 
of  David's  Psalm  or  not.  If  it  is,  then  ac- 
cording to  our  own  theory  no  fault  has  been 
committed,  and  surely  we  would  not  censure 
a  person  for  singing  a  good  version  of  a 
Bible  Psalm.  But,  non  est  tanti— the  re- 
mark has  not  weight  enough  to  defeat  or 
defer  the  action.  I  have  the  resolution 
before  me:  it  is  something  of  a  curiosity. 

Now,  if  the  reader  will  compare  the  100th 
Psalm,  first  part,  in  the  Presbyterian  book, 
and  the  100th  Psalm,  long  metre,  in  the 
Associate  Reformed  book,  with  the  prose 
translation  in  the  Bible,  he  will  find  that 
the  former  is  the  closer  paraphrase  of  the 
two  I 

In  these  two  cases,  then,  we  seethe  judi- 
catories of  the  church  chastizing  one  per- 
son out  of  their  communion,  and  showing 
the  rod  of  discipline  to  another,  for  doing 
what  is  not  forbidden  in  the  word  of  God, 
what  is  not  forbidden  in  the  church  stand- 
ards, and  what  is  in  perfect  agreement  .with 


ON    PSALMODY.  115 

their   own  theory  and  their    own  repeated 
statements  on  the  "  question  of  versions." 


CHAPTER    XII. 


SOME  ARGUMENTS  OF  A  SECONDARY  CLASS 
NOTICED. 

Although  I  might  here  suspend  my  ex- 
amination of  this  subject,  with  the  convic- 
tion that  enough  had  been  dc  ne  to  show  the 
incorrectness  and  novelty  of  the  notion 
prevalent  in  the  Associate  Reformed  church, 
yet,  lest  I  should  appear  forgetful  or  unjust, 
I  will  briefly  notice  some  other  arguments 
of  a  subordinate  character. 

1.  It  is  said,  "in  singing  the  Psalms  of 
David,  the  worshipper  has  a  feeling  of  con- 
fidence that  what  he  is  singing  is  acceptable 
to  God,  which  he  cannot  have  in  singing 
other  hymns  and  paraphrases.''  In  u  »ing 
this  argument,  it  is  common  to  exhibit 
strong  contrasts  between  Bible  Psalms  and 
human  composures ;  the  words  of  inspiration 
and  the  tinkling  fancies  of  poets;  translations 
*&nd  imitations ;  the  songs  of  Zion  and  those 


116  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

of  Parnassus.  But  let  us  look  at  it,  with 
the  eyes  of  candor  and  in  the  light  of  logic 
and  scripture.     I  answer,  then, 

1st.  No  man  of  intelligent  piety  will  place 
the  words  of  men  on  a  level  with  the  word 
of  God :  but  a  poetical  translation  of  Isaiah's 
or  of  John's  writings  is  no  more  a  "  human 
composure"  than  a  like  translation  of  Da- 
vid's Psalms  is  a  human  composure.  And 
the  confidence  that  restricts  us  to  the  one 
and  repudiates  the  other,  assimilates  toe 
nearly  to  the  character  of  caprice  and  pre- 
judice, to  be  entitled  to  much  credit  as  a 
ground  of  argument.  Many  a  person  has 
been  confident  that  he  was  doing  an  accep- 
table service  to  God,  who  might  better  have 
been  employed  in  some  other  way. 

2nd.  In  singing  hymns,  we  have  the  same 
standard  and  method  of  judging  of  their 
agreement  with  the  teachings  of  God's  word, 
that  we  have  for  sermons,  prayers,  books 
and  conduct.  If  they  are  approved  by  that 
word,  why  may  we  not  have  confidence  that 
they  are  right?  and,  if  right,  why  may  we 
not  have  confidence  that  they  are  acceptable 
to  God?  If  they  are  not  agreeable  in  sen- 
timent to  the  word  of  God,  we  should  reject 
them.  But  it  is  no  part  of  wisdom  or 
piety,  to  treat  the  good  and  the  bad  alike, 
rejecting  the  former  as  much  as  the  latter. 

3d.  The  odium  that  has  attached  to  the- 


ON    PSALMODY.  117 

idea  of  "imitations,"  in  this  discussion,  is 
more  real  than  reasonable.  An  imitation 
of  a  good  thing  is  good  in  proportion  to  the 
closeness  of  the  resemblance.  The  best 
imitation  of  a  Psalm,  is  what  comes  nearest 
to  the  Psalm  itself:  even  as  a  book  is  the 
best  religious  book  which  comes  nearest  to 
the  Bible.  If  an  imitation  claims  to  be  the 
original,  or  of  equal  authority,  it  is  then  a 
counterfeit.  But  this  claim  is  not  made  for 
any  version  or  paraphrase  or  imitation  ex- 
cept ours,  which  is  perpetually  called  the 
"Inspired  Psalter,"  "the  God-given  Psalm 
Book." 

4th.  From  the  mere  fact  that  we  are 
singing  the  words  of  scripture,  we  cannot  be 
sure  that  we  are  praising  God  aright;  unless 
it  is  certain  that  those  words  are  never 
misapplied,  never  perverted,  never  misun- 
derstood. The  form  of  words  may  be  used 
and  yet  not  used  rightly;  and  then  the 
confidence  that  we  are  worshipping  God 
acceptably  will  be  a  false  confidence.  This 
is  the  fatal  delusion  in  all  formalism.  The 
familiar  enquiry,  often  urged  with  a  tingling 
emphasis  on  the  ear  of  hymn  singers,  "Who 
hath  required  this  at  your  hands?"  (Is.  i? 
12,)  was  not  addressed  to  those  who  failed  in 
the  matter  and  form  of  their  service,  but  who 
failed  in  the  spirit  of  it,  while  they  observed 
the  form.     And  the  sin  of  Nadab  and  Abihu, 


118  A   PLEA   FOR    PEACE 

so  often  drawn  forth  to  gleam  its  minatory 
terrors  on  the  singers  of  hymns,  did  not 
consist  in  the  adulteration  of  the  incense, 
but  in  offering  it  with  strange  fire.  Both 
these  historical  events  may  be  pondered 
with  advantage,  as  well  by  those  who  sing 
the  old  Psalms  as  by  those  who  sing  the 
new,  and  they  may  afford  admonition  to  all; 
to  rest  not  in  forms,  but  to  worship  God  in 
spirit  and  in  truth;  for  such  worship  he 
approves  and  accepts. 

2.  Another  argument  is,  that  the  churches 
which  have  left  the  Bible  Psalms  have  fallen 
into  errors.  By  Bible  Psalms,  here,  is 
meant  Rouse's  versification  of  them.  I 
know  of  no  evangelical  church  that  has  left 
the  Bible  Psalms:  I  am  sure  our  Presbyte- 
rian brethren  have  not.  But  churches  have 
fallen  into  errors,  which  have  not  left  the 
versification  of  them  used  by  us.  Arian 
heresy  diffused  itself  widely  in  the  Presby- 
terian church  in  Ireland.  The  doctrinal 
error  of  Arminianism,  and  the  practical 
error  of  Moderatism  corrupted  the  church 
of  Scotland.  The  position  of  the  three 
great  ecclesiastical  bodies  of  that  country, 
;at  the  present  time,  is  peculiarly  instructive. 
In  point  of  orthodoxy  and  piety,  the  United 
Presbyterian  and  the  Free  churches  are  far 
in.  advance  of  the  Established  church.  Yet 
tte  Established  church  uses  almost  exclu- 


ON    PSALMODY.  119 


sively  Rouse's  version  of  the  Psalms;  while 
the  Free  church  makes  free  use  of  the  par- 
aphrases, some  of  which  are  Watts'  hymns-; 
and  the  United  Presbyterian  or  Secession 
church  is  just  now  adopting  several  hundred 
hymns,  in  addition  to  their  old  Psalmody. 

I  suppose  I  may  also,  without  impropri- 
ety, refer  to  matters  nearer  home.  The  Se- 
ceders  used  to  say  that  the  Associate  Re- 
formed church  had  fallen  into  grievous  errors 
and  corruptions ;  and  their  testimony  is  still 
lifted  up  against  us.  Nay,  Seceders,  Uniona 
and  Covenanters,  all  agreeing  on  Psalmody :, 
have  carried  on  reciprocal  controversies 
with  each  other,  and  have  sometimes  raised 
such  a  dust  about  each  others  errors,  that 
most  people  could  not  see  what  their  errors 
were !  But  they  have  testified  against  each 
other,  and,  in  rare  instances,  the  witness  of 
two  out  of  the  three  has  agreed  as  to  the  er- 
rors of  the  third !  On  two  points  there  is  now 
great  unanimity — on  the  exclusion  of  all 
hymns  from  their  system  of  praise,  and  the 
exclusion  of  each  other  from  church  com- 
munion. 

But  it  is  more  important  to  observe,  in 
reply  to  this  argument,  that  it  seems  to 
attribute  to  the  singing  of  the  Psalms,  in  a 
particular  version,  a  greater  conservative 
power  against  error,  than  belongs  to  all  the 
.ordinances  of  religion  besides — to  prayer, 


120  A   PLEA   FOR   PEACE 

preaching,  sacraments,  reading  the  word  of 
God  and  all !  This  looks  like  doing  dishonor 
to  the  institutions  of  the  Head  of  the  church, 
which  he  has  appointed  for  its  edification, 
merely  to  support  a  tottering  notion  of  our 
own.  To  hear  some  persons  talk,  one  would 
suppose  they  regarded  the  singing  of  Da- 
vid's Psalms  as  the  main,  if  not  the  only 
preservative  against  error,  and  the  singing 
of  hymns,  however  orthodox  and  scriptural, 
as  tending  so  strongly  to  error,  that  all 
other  restraining  and  sanctifying  influences 
are  scarcely  sufficient  to  withstand  it.  The 
churches,  they  say,  that  have  fallen  into  the 
Unitarian  heresies  are  churches  that  left  the 
Bible  Psalms  and  took  to  singing  hymns. 
By  this  reasoning,  addressed  to  the  fears  of 
christians,  it  is  intimated  that  the  singing 
of  hymns  is  the  cause  or  occasion  of  the 
Unitarian  errors. 

This  is  poor,  short-sighted  logic.  The 
handle  is  as  sharp  as  the  point,  of  such 
arguments.  Our  brethren  think  that  hymn- 
singing  is  itself  a  great  error  and  sin :  how 
happens  it,  then,  that  the  mighty  conserva- 
tive power  of  singing  our  Psalter  does  not 
keep  people  from  falling  into  this?  If  it 
keeps  people  from  the  error  of  Unitarian- 
ism,  why  does  it  not  keep  them  from  the 
error  of  singing  hymns?  Even  admitting 
the   facts  to  be  as  alleged,  the  reasoning 


Off   PSALMODY.  121 

leads  to  unsound  conclusions,  because  it 
confounds  antecedents  with  causes,  and 
identifies  consequents  and  effects,  I  will 
illustrate  this :  our  brethren  say,  many  peo- 
ple and  even  churches,  that  sang  songs  of 
human  composure  in  worshipping  God,  have 
fallen  into  the  error  of  Unitarianism ;  there- 
fore the  singing  of  such  composures  is  to  be 
deprecated.  With  the  same  reasoning,  it 
might  be  answered,  many  people  and  even 
churches,  that  sang  the  Scotch  version  of 
Psalrns,  have  fallen  into  the  error  of  hymn- 
singing  ;  therefore  the  singing  of  the  Scotch 
version  is  to  be  deprecated. 

It  is  sometimes  stated,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  that  people  who  sing  other  songs  of 
praise,  besides  the  Psalms  of  David,  go  off 
to  corrupt  churches,  and  it  is  implied  that 
they  have  a  great  facility  in  making  such 
transition.  In  the  same  way,  it  might  be 
said,  that  people  go  in  considerable  num- 
bers, from  time  to  time,  out  of  churches 
which  sing  David's  Psalms  exclusively,  and 
join  Presbyterian  churches.  .So  that,  wheth- 
er this  style  of  reasoning  or  this  allegation 
of  facts  be  considered,  we  reach  as  strong 
conclusions  against  the  old  Psalms  as  against 
the  new.  And  the  matter  in  dispute  must 
be  settled  on  other  grounds  than  such  soph- 
:stries  supply. 

3.  The   frequent  changes   made   in   the 


122  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

Psalmody  of  other  churches  are  adduced  as 
evidences  of  a  defect  in  the  principle  of  it. 
I  answer,  that  changes  alone  are  no  evidence 
of  a  defect  in  the  principle;  because  chan- 
ges have  been  made  in  the  strictest  kind  of 
scripture  Psalmody,  and  changes  are  still 
desired,  very  generally  in  our  church.  Per- 
fection is  not  claimed  for  any  Psalmody  now 
in  use,  either  in  our  church  or  in  any  other. 
But  I  cannot  see  that  admitted  imperfection 
is  either  diminished  or  concealed  by  being 
left  undisturbed ;  or  that  it  is  increased  by 
those  efforts  at  improvement  which  are 
made  in  changes.  Improvements  have  often 
been  prevented  by  the  fear  of  changing; 
and  have  often  been  condemned  under  the 
opprobrious  name  of  innovations.  This 
spirit  has  convulsed  and  distracted  congre- 
gations, when  so  small  a  change  was  made 
as  the  giving  out  of  two  lines  instead  of  one, 
or  the  singing  of  one  line  twice  over,  to 
suit  a  tune.  I  have  no  doubt,  that  some 
good  people  read  with  weeping  eyes  the 
decree  of  Church  and  State  which,  in  1650, 
4; discharged"  the  Bible  Psalms  of  Stern- 
hold  and  Hopkins,  and  ordained  the  use  of 
this  new  paraphrase  of  Mr.  Rouse,  then 
recently  imported  from  England.  So,  at  a 
later  date,  when  Tate  and  Brady's  version 
was  introduced  into  the  English  church, 
many  people  were  greatly  displeased  at  the 


ON  PSALMODY.  123 

change,  and,  as  Cowper  playfully  said, 
u  highly  disgusted  at  the  innovation,  they 
stick  as  obstinately  to  the  old  version  as  to 
the  Old  style." 

After  all,  the  only  difference  between  the 
Presbyterians  and  us  in  this  particular  is, 
that  we  have  desired  change,  and  they  have 
made  it;  we  have  wished  for  an  improve- 
ment of  the  Psalmody,  they  have  wished  for 
it  and  tried  to  get  it. 

4.  One  of  the  most  extraordinary  state- 
ments ever  made  on  this  subject  is,  that  the 
Psalmody  of  other  churches  is  sectarian, 
while  ours  is  altogether  divested  of  that  char- 
acter. This  singular  idea  is  put  forth  in  a 
doctrinal  and  historical  tract,  issued  by  our 
General  Synod.  In  itself  and  its  attendant 
reasonings,  it  is  precisely  like  those  of  the 
errorists  who  oppose  creeds  and  confessions. 
,%Our  Psalmody  is  as  broad  as  the  Bible," 
(which,  by  the  way,  is  not  quite  true,  as 
long  as  we  reject  a  great  number  of  Bible 
songs,)  "it  is  the  very  word  of  God,  it  is  in- 
spired and  infallible ;  while  others  are  formed 
by  sects  to  suit  their  own  views,  man-made 
productions,"  &c.  &c.  This  is  just  the  style 
of  those  who  make  the  Bible,  as  they  say, 
their  creed,  and  refuse  those  useful  formu- 
laries which  all  orthodox  and  evangelical 
churches  are  accustomed  to  use. 

We  might  apply  this  notion  to  prayers  as 


124  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

-well  as  to  praises,  and  deny  the  right  to 
pray  in  any  other  words  but  those  of  scrip- 
ture: all  such  prayers  might  be  called  man- 
made,  and  sectarian,  and  lacking  in  cathol- 
icity. We  have  more  authority  for  such 
restriction  in  prayers  than  in  praises.  Our 
Savior  said,  "  when  ye  pray,  say,  Our  Fath- 
er which  art  in  heaven,"  &c.  but  he  has  not 
said,  when  ye  sing,  sing  the  Psalms  of  David. 
A  similar  strain  of  remark  might  be  made 
on  the  ordinance  of  preaching  sermons,  but 
I  will  not  pursue  it. 

It  is  remarkable,  that  while  our  Psalmody 
is  claimed  to  be  the  only  unsectarian  system 
extant,  no  church  makes  its  Psalmody  more 
prominent,  as  a  distinctive  peculiarity  of 
sect.  It  is  pre-eminently  our  distinction: 
on  this  article  we  separate  from  other  de- 
nominations:  we  make  it  a  term  of  commu- 
nion: it  is  conspicuous  in  all  our  church 
policy.  And  yet,  strange  to  say,  it  is  the 
only  unsectarian  and  real  catholic  Psalmody 
in  the  world !  If  it  is  not  sectarian  in  itself, 
we  have  done  what  we  could  to  make  it  so. 

I  will  now  notice  some  of  the  minor  argu- 
mentation against  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
Book  of  Psalms  in  praising  God. 

1.  An  objection  has  been  raised  on  the 
ground  that  some  of  the  -Psalms  contain 
much  matter  that  was  personal  to  the  wri- 
ters,  and  peculiar  to  the  times,  historical 


6N     PSALM0M*.  125 

narrative  and  ceremonial  language.  It  is 
not  disparaging  to  the  Book  of.  Psalms,  to 
make  a  distinction  between  these  things  and 
those  of  general  interest  and  obligation, 
any  more  than  it  is  to  the  Book  of  Exodus, 
to  make  a  similar  distinction  between  the 
moral  and  the  ceremonial  laws  recorded  in 
it.  This  is  the  distinction  made  by  Dr. 
Watts,  which  has  given  so  much  offence. 
The  local,  personal  and  ceremonial  parts  of 
the  Psalms,  he  deemed  not  to  be  suited  to 
the  use  of  persons  worshipping  in  the 
church,  under  its  Xew  Testament  dispensa- 
tion. I  verily  believe,  that  he  intended  to 
express  the  same  idea  that  is  expressed  in 
the  Directory  of  the  Associate  Reformed 
church,  and  has  been  expressed  a  thousand 
times  in  " prefacing  the  Psalms,"  by  our 
ministers,  viz.  "  In  singing  those  parts  of 
them  (the  Psalms)  which  are  expressed  in 
ceremonial  style,  or  describe  the  circumstan- 
ces of  the  writers,  or  of  the  church  in 
ancient  times,  we  should  have  our  eye  upon 
the  general  principles  which  are  implied  in 
them,  and  which  are  applicable  to  individu- 
als or  to  the  church  in  any  age,"  [Book  3, 
Ch.  3,  Sec.  3. 

Some  of  the  Psalms  themselves  inform  us 

of  the  special  occasions  on  which  they  were 

composed  and  of  the  particular  and  personal 

application  of  them  in  the  first  place.     Of 

D    2 


126  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

others  we  have  no  such  information.  We 
have  "  A  Psalm  of  David,  when  he  fled  from 
Absalom  his  son;"  (the  3d,)  "A  Psalm  of 
David,  when  he  changed  his  behavior  before 
Abimelech;  who  drove  him  away,  and  he 
departed,  (34th;)  "A  Psalm  of  David,  when 
Xathan  the  prophet  came  unto  him  after  he 
had  gone  in  to  Bathsheba,  (51st.)  There  are 
many  others  of  the  same  class.  Whether 
they  were  ever  sung  on  any  other  occasion, 
or  at  any  other  time,  we  have  not  the  means 
of  knowing.  The  explicit  mention  of  the 
particular  occasion  would  favor  the  idea  that 
chey  were  not  intended  for  repetition ;  but 
the  general  and  devotional  strain  of  the 
pieces  themselves  seems  to  fit  them  for  uni- 
versal use. 

I  do  not  consider  the  personal  and  cere- 
monial expressions  found  in  the  Psalms,  as 
any  objection  to  the  singing  of  them;  pro- 
vided the  worshipper  sings  them  with  un- 
derstanding and  with  faith,  as  enjoined  in 
the  Directory.  It  does  not,  however,  appear 
to  make  much  difference  whether  the  "gene- 
ral principles "  contained  in  such  parts  of 
the  Psalms,  be  set  before  the  worshipper  in 
a  short  explanatory  lecture,  as  in  the  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  church,  or  by  an  explanatory 
paraphrase,  as  in  the  Presbyterian.  In 
view  of  the  above  important  clause  of  the 
Directory,  it   is   to   be  regretted  that  the 


ON  PSALMODY.  127 


practice  of  "  explaining  the  Psalm  "  is  going 
out  of  use  in  the  church,  whereby  the  people 
will  be  exposed  to  the  danger  of  not  keeping 
their  eye  upon  the  general  principles  implied 
in  the  expressions  referred  to,  and  applicable 
to  themselves. 

2.  It  is  objected  to  our  mode  of  praise, 
that  the  name  of  Jesus  is  never  heard  in  it. 
I  have  no  doubt  that  many  and  many  a 
believing  worshipper  of  Jesus  Christ  has 
found  him  in  the  Psalms,  and  has  sweetly 
praised  him  with  these  songs  of  Zion.  But 
still,  he  is  not,  in  the  Psalms  or  in  any  part 
of  the  Old  Testament  scriptures,  revealed 
so  plainly  or  so  fully  as  in  the  New.  To 
suppose  that  he  is,  is  contrary  to  the  claims 
and  design  of  both.  And  now  that  he  has 
been  personally  revealed  in  the  flesh ;  and 
the  name  of  Jesus  figures  in  the  evangelic 
history,  from  the  annunciation  to  the  cross ; 
and  he  is  known  by  that  glorious  appellation 
in  heaven,  earth  and  hell,  it  seems,  it  seems 
as  though  the  name  of  Jesus  should  be  heard 
in  the  praises  of  those  whom  he  has  loved, 
whom  he  has  bought  with  his  blood,  whom 
he  has  made  kings  and  priests  unto  God. 
The  Scriptures  make  much  of  that  worthy 
name:  "Thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus; 
because  he  shall  save  his  people  from  their 
sins." — Matt,  i,  21.  "Whatsoever  ye  do 
in  word  or  deed,  do  all  in  the  name  of  the 


128  A  PLEA   FOR  PEACE 

:Lord  Jesus,  giving  thanks  unto  God  and  the 
•Father  by  him."— Col.  iii,  17.  "  By  him, 
therefore,  let  us  offer  the  sacrifice  of  praise 
to  God  continually,  that  is,  the  fruit  of  our 
lips,  giving  thanks  to  his  name." — Heb.  xiii, 
15.  And  if  we  will  consider  it  candidly,  it 
is  a  sad  thing,  that  we  pass  through  our 
entire  christian  life,  even  to  the  threshold 
of  heaven,  loving  him,  serving  him,  saved 
by  him,  and  yet,  without  his  dear  name 
Jesus  being  ever  heard  in  our  songs  cf 
praise !  Would  a  stranger  attending  in  our 
places  of  worship,  be  able  to  report  of  us 
as  was  done  of  the  christians  in  the  days  of 
Pliny,  that  we  "sing  hymns  to  Christ  as 
God?"  He  might  learn  it  from  our  ser- 
mons, from  our  prayers,  from  our  explana- 
tions of  the  Psalms,  but  not  from  our  sing- 
ing itself. 

3.  An  argument  for  singing  hymns  of 
human  composition,  has  been  drawn  from 
the  admitted  propriety  of  conceiving  our 
thoughts  and  uttering  our  words  in  prayer. 
The  usual  colloquial  form  of  expressing 
this  idea  is,  "we may  use  our  own  words  in 
praise  as  well  as  in  prayer."  And  the 
usual  way  of  answering  this  statement  is, 
that  the  great  majority  of  christians  do  not 
and  cannot  use  their  oivn  words,  in  their 
hymns  of  praise.  There  is  here  a  turn  on 
the  expression,    "our  own  words."     But  it 


ON  PSALMODY.  129 


is  not  meant,  that  each  individual  must 
compose  all  the  hymns  or  any  of  the  hymns 
that  he  sings:  it  is  only  meant  that  he  may 
use  human  composition,  as  distinguished 
from  the  inspired.  And  further  this  answer 
intimates  that  but  few  persons  can  make 
hymns  of  praise:  two  difficulties  are  in  the 
way,  the  one  a  theological  and  the  other  a 
literary  difficulty. 

As  to  the  first,  our  brethren  affirm  that 
man  cannot  know  what  attributes  and  excel- 
lencies to  ascribe  to  God.  This  seems  to 
overlook  all  the  knowledge  of  God  which  we 
obtain  from  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  from 
Christ  and  the  Apostles.  It  has  often 
been  said,  in  praise  of  the  Psalms,  that  they 
contain  an  epitome  of  all  the  truths  of  the 
Bible,  but  I  have  never  heard  it  said,  that 
they  teach  us  more  than  all  the  rest  of  the 
Bible  does,  what  God  is  and  what  glories  to 
ascribe  to  him.  Yet  this  notion  seems  to 
imply  as  much.  But  the  other  parts  of  holy 
Scripture  are  as  authentic  a  revelation  of 
what  God  is  and  of  what  he  does,  as  the 
Psalms  are:  and  we  could  praise  him  intel- 
ligently even  if  all  the  precious  Psalms  of 
the  Bible  were  lost.  If  we  use  the  words 
of  Paul  or  of  John,  we  may  have  as  much 
confidence  that  our  ascriptions  are  correct, 
as  we  could  have  when  using  those  of  David 
and   Asaph;  "0  the   depth  of  the    riches 


130  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

both  of  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God^ 
How  unsearchable  are  his  judgments,  and 
his  ways  past  finding  out!" — Horn,  xi,  33. 
"To  the  king  eternal,  immortal  and  invisi- 
ble," &c— 1  Tim.  i,  17.  "Unto  him  that 
loved  us  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his 
own  blood,  and  hath  made  us  kings  and 
priests  unto  God  and  his  Father;  to  him  be 
glory  and  dominion  forever  and  ever,  amen.', 
— Rev.  i,  5,  6.  These  divine  praises  are 
found  in  the  Scriptures,  but  not  in  the 
Psalms.  They  are  some  of  those  other 
icripture  songs  or  praises,  which  our  breth- 
ren say  it  is  wrong  to  sing  in  the  worship  of 
God. 

Now  as  to  the  literary  difficulty,  that  is 
in  the  way  of  praising  God  in  our  own 
words.  The  difficulty  is  imaginary,  and 
springs  from  erroneous  notions  of  what  a 
hymn  is.  It  is  not  necessary  to  a  hymn, 
that  it  should  be  in  rhyme,  or  in  any  regular 
metre,  or  suited  to  any  particular  tune.  A 
hymn  is  an  ascription  of  praise  to  God, 
expressed  in  the  style  of  excited  and  eleva- 
ted devotional  feeling.  "Hosanna  to  the 
son  of  David,"  was  a  hymn  to  Christ. 
Some  christians  have  been  accustomed, 
in  their  private  devotions,  to  utter  their 
thoughts  and  express  their  feelings,  their 
desires  and  their  praises,  in  a  musical  tone 
of  voice,  without  any  regard  to  rhyme,  tune 


ON  PSALMODY.  131 

or  measure.  It  has  a  tendency  to  confine 
the  thoughts  and  make  the  devotional  im- 
pressions more  deep,  and  to  elevate  the 
affections  more  to  God.  This  was  undoubt- 
edly the  hymning  spoken  of  in  several  pla- 
ces in  the  New  Testament.  Such  were  the 
songs  of  Moses,  of  Deborah,  of  Simeon,  and 
of  others  which  have  been  mentioned.  And 
such,  probably,  were  the  "  songs  in  the 
night,"  Job  xxxv,  10.  And  it  is  just  as  easy 
for  a  christian  who  is  intelligent  and  devout, 
to  make  a  hymn,  a  it  is  to  make  a  prayer. 
The  difficulty,  then,  is  imaginary.  The 
propriety  of  doing  it  has  before  been  shown 
at  length.  And  the  argument  that  shows 
it,  embraces  hymns  made  by  our  fellow  men, 
equally  with  those  which  each  person  may 
make  for  himself. 

I  might  multiply  these  minor  arguments 
for  the  use  of  other  songs  of  praise,  besides 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  psalms,  but  I  will 
forbear.  I  will  forbear,  also,  to  recapitu- 
late the  reasonings  pursued  throughout  this 
treatise.  The  smallness  of  the  Book  ren- 
ders this  unnecessary.  The  proof  of  the 
paraphrastic  character  of  our  psalter  ;  the 
refutation  of  the  main  argument  for  the  ex- 
clusive use  of  this  versification  or  of  the 
psalms  in  any  version ;  the  positive  argu- 
ment from  Scripture  showing  a  divine  war- 
rant for  the  use  of  other  psalms,  hymns, 


132  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

and  spiritual  songs ;  the  historical  evidence 
in  favor  of  the  practice  in  Apostolic  times, 
in  the  early  church,  at  the  Reformation,  in 
the  church  of  Scotland  and  the  Secession, 
and  in  the  Associate  Reformed  church ;  the 
proof  drawn  from  the  fact  that  the  stand- 
ards of  the  church  do  not  forbid  it — all  these 
things  will  occur  to  the  attentive  reader's 
mind,  and  will  persuade  him  that  the  doc- 
trine of  exclusive  use,  as  held  by  many  in 
the  A.  R.  Church,  is  an  unsciiptural  and 
very  modern  innovation. 

My  object  in  adducing  these  arguments 
and  historical  facts,  has  been  to  show  to 
my  brethren  that  their  position  is  not  on  so 
firm  a  basis,  that  they  may  be  uncomprom- 
ising and  unaccommodating  to  those  chris- 
tians who  differ  from  them  on  this  point. 
I  have  attempted  honestly  to  exhibit  the 
doctrine  of  Scripture,  and  the  teaching  of 
history,  on  this  subject.  I  have  tried  to  do 
it  with  candor  and  kindness.  And  it  has 
been  done  with  a  confidence  in  the  reader's 
intelligence  and  probity,  which  has  exempt- 
ed me  from  the  humiliating  necessity  of 
perpetually  reminding  him  of  the  strength 
of  the  arguments  and  of  the  utter  impossi- 
bility of  withstanding  them.  I  hope  I  have 
not  erred  in  leaving  the  discovery  of  this  to 
the  reader's  OAvn  discernment.  It  is  no -un- 
due assurance,  I  trust,  to  claim  that  there 


03T   PSALMODY.  13? 

is  argument  enough  to  prove,  that  the  use 
of  other  songs  of  praise  may  be  made  a 
subject  of  forbearance,  and  that  to  exclude 
from  our  christian  fellowship  those  who  use 
them,  is  contrary  both  to  the  word  of  God 
and  our  own  church  standards.  And  if 
the  doctrine  that  would  bind  us  to  the  ex- 
clusive use  of  the  Bible  psalms,  and  make 
that  a  term  of  communion,  is  contrary  to 
Scripture  and  to  our  standards ;  much  more 
contrary  is  that  doctrine,  which  would  bind 
us,  in  like  manner,  to  the  exclusive  use  of 
our  version. 

0,  will  not  brethren,  then,  leave  this  sub- 
ject where  scripture  and  reason  place  it  ? 
Shall  it  ever  continue  a  stumbling  stone  and 
occasion  of  strife  and  enmity?  Must  the 
high  interests  of  the  soul  and  of  Christ  be 
sacrificed  on  this  Baal  altar  of  party  preju- 
dice? Shall  a  "  doubtful  disputation"  sepa- 
rate brethren  whom  heaven  will  unite,  par- 
takers of  the  same  grace,  and  professors  of 
the  same  precious  faith  ?  We  have  a  clear 
divine  warrant  for  the  communion  of  saints. 
We  have  unequivocal  and  reiterated  injunc- 
tions and  earnest  entreaties,  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, to  maintain  the  unity  of  the  spirit 
and  the  bonds  of  peace.  And  we  have  im- 
perious calls,  in  the  word  and  providence  of 
God,  to  strive  earnestly  and  jointly  for  the 
faith  of  the  Gospel.  Shall  all  this  be  un- 
D3 


134  A    PLEA    FOR  PEACE 

heard  and  unheeded,  through  the  din  of 
strife  raised  by  a  few  combatants  about 
psalmody  ?  The  peace  and  amity  which  we 
advocate  requires  no  sacrifice  of  principle ; 
no  change  of  practice,  even.  We  may  still 
sing  as  we  have  done,  but  let  us  restore  the 
broken  chain  of  friendly  fellowship  with  our 
brethren.  Christians,  has  not  this  one- 
barred  fence  kept  you  long  enough  asun- 
der ?  Bleeding  church  of  Christ,  may  thy 
children  cease  to  inflict  wounds  on  thee  ! 


CHAPTER    XIII. 


SUPPLEMENTAL. 


Since  writing  the  foregoing  part  of  this 
work,  the  ecclesiastical  relations  of  the  au- 
thor have  undergone  some  change.  For 
nearly  a  year  and  a  half,  he  has  been  in 
happy  fellowship  with  the  Presbyterian 
church.  No  change  of  views  is  he  con- 
scious of,  in  relation  to  any  part  of  the  doc- 
trine, order,  or  worship  of  Christ's  church, 
nor  of  any  diminution  of  attachment  to  any 
portion  of  Christ's  people.  And  in  now 
publishing  a  treatise  which  he  wrote  when 
Ve  had  no  prospect  of  leaving  his  former 


ON    PSALMODY.  135 

church  connection,  he  does  not  find  it  ne- 
cessary to  make  any  material  alteration 
either  m  the  sentiments  or  expressions  of  it. 
Having  had  the  unusual  advantage  of  con- 
templating the  subject  of  psalmody  from 
two  very  different  positions — from  within 
and  from  without  the  Associate  Reformed 
Church, — and  having  had  the  opportunity 
of  fraternal  intercourse  with  the  two  por- 
tions of  God's  people  whose  mutual  good 
feeling  and  fellowship  he  has  aimed,  in  his 
essay  on  psalmody,  to  promote  ;  he  now  offers 
a  few  additional  remarks  on  the  subject, 
and  with  the  same  conciliatory  design. 

The  department  of  service  in  which  I 
have  been  engaged,  has  led  me  to  visit  ma- 
ny churches  in  Western  Pennsylvania, 
Western  Virginia,  and  the  Eastern  part  of 
Ohio.  I  have  found  a  considerable  number 
of  Presbyterian  churches  which  use  the  old 
psalms  alone,  in  public  worship,  and  many 
which  use  them  a  part  of  the  time.  This 
does  not  impair  brotherly  affection  between 
them  and  their  brethren  who  do  not  use  this 
versification  at  all,  nordoes  it  prevent  their 
happy  and  edifying  communion  with  each 
other.  This  shows  that  a  similar  amity  and 
fellowship  might  subsist  between  the  Pres- 
byterian church  and  those  churches  which 
use  the  old  psalms;  nay  it  shows  that  they 
might  be  united  in  the  same  body  without 


136  A    PLEA   FOR   PEACE 

embarrassment  or  injury,  if  they  themselves 
did  not  decline  it.     I  have   been  in  some 
neighborhoods,  where  a  state  of  things  as- 
similating to  this  actually  exists,  giving  en- 
couragement  to  hope   for  yet  nearer   ap- 
proximations.    The  notion  that  it  is  wrong 
to  sing  any   songs    of  praise,   except   the 
psalms,  is  by  no  means  universal  among  the 
ministers,  elders,  candidates  for  the  minis- 
try, or  people  of  the  Associate  Reformed 
church.      Facts,    which   are  the   best   evi- 
dence, prove  this.     An  aged  and  respecta- 
ble gentleman  said,  on  this  point,  "  It  don't 
hurt  my  conscience  to  sing  a  good  hymn." 
Others  declare  the    same   thing,   by  their 
practice.     Some  who  abstain  from  singing 
praise  to  God  with  their  fellow  christians, 
in  the  use  of  the  Assembly's  Collection,  de- 
clare it  to  be  only  in  accommodation  to  the 
wishes  of  others  and  not  from  any  belief 
that  it  is  wrong.     Others  do  not  hesitate  to 
say,  that  they  regard  the  prohibition,  which 
custom  has  imposed,  as  oppressive  on  the 
conscience ;  and  the  espionage  on  their  lips 
when  worshipping  in  churches  of  other  de- 
nominations, as  humiliating  and  invidious. 
As  to  the  religious  character  of  Union- 
ists, Presbyterians,  Seceders  and  Covenant- 
ers, for  they  are  all  found  in  some  locali- 
ties, there  is  no  perceptible  difference  among 
them.     They  are,  generally  speaking,  the 


ON    PSALMODY.  137 

same  kind  of  sound,  serious  intelligent, 
christian  people,  all  attached  to  the  Presby- 
terian order  and  to  the  Calvinistic  doc- 
trines, .  regular  at  church,  and  worshipping 
God  in  their  families.  Now  why  should 
people  who  are  so  much  alike  in  all  their 
religious  faith  and  character  be  divided? 
Why  should  schisms  be  perpetuated  among 
these  followers  of  Christ?  It  is  giving  too 
much  consideration  to  a  new  doctrine ;  it  is 
too  costly  a  sacrifice  ta  denominational  po- 
licy. 

I  dare  say,  even  those,  champions  of 
psalmody,  who  have  taken  the  doctrine  of 
"  exclusive  use"  under  their  special  patron- 
age and  protection,  will  admit  all  that  has 
been  said  in-favor  of  peace  and  unity  :  but 
then,  they  say  they  must  maintain  purity 
of  worship,  and  teach  men  "  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  Christ  has  commanded." 
Mat.  28:19.  True  brethren,  true;  but  in 
this  case  you  teach  what  he  has  not  com- 
manded. We  look  in  vain  for  any  such 
command  of  Christ,  or  of  any  prophet,  priest, 
or  king,  apostle  or  evangelist,  before  your- 
selves, either  in  the  Scripture  or  in  any 
creed  or  confession. 

But,  the  doctrine  that  has  not  hitherto  been 
admitted  into  any  Confession,  is  now  an  ap- 
plicant for  that  honor.  I  refer  to  a  docu- 
ment  lately  published,  which  the  Associate 
D3* 


138  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

Synod  offer  to  the  Associate  Reformed,  as  a 
Basis  of  Union  between  the  two  bodies.  It 
was  admitted,  I  understand,  to  have  been 
hastily  prepared  and  not  discussed  in  detail, 
by  the  A.  Synod.  I  feel  less  diffidence, 
therefore,  in  making  a  few  friendly  animad- 
versions upon  it,  than  I  would  have  felt,  if 
it  had  been  fully  discussed  by  a  Synod 
which  includes  so  many  judicious,  able,  and 
pious  servants  of  Jesus  Christ  as  I  know  be- 
long to  that  body.  The  two  following  sen- 
tences express  the  doctrine,  judicially  pro- 
mulged  in  the  basis  :  "  We  maintain  that 
Jesus  Christ  has  appointed  the  Book  of 
Psalms  to  be  used  exclusively  in  this  part 
of  his  worship."  "The  substitution  or  use 
of  uninspired  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual 
songs,  imitations  of  the  Book  of  Psalms, 
and  paraphrases,  is  a  corruption  of  the 
worship  of  God/'  The  Scripture  proofs 
adduced  for  this  new  doctrine,  admitted  not 
to  be  in  the  Westminster  Confession,  are 
these  three,  Eph.  v,  19;  Col.  iii,  16;  2 
Chron.  xxix,  30.  But  my  eyes  look  in 
vain,  for  the  exclusive  clause,  in  either  of 
these  proof  texts,  and  the  "  exclusive  doc- 
trine" is  the  only  one  which  is  controvert- 
ed. I  have  treated  of  the  first  two  of  these 
texts  before,  and  I  only  add  here,  that  if 
they  were  admitted  to  refer  to  the  Bible 
Psalms  alone,  still  they  do  not  support  the 


ON  PSALMODY.  139 


Synod's  doctrine.  The  reference,  in  these 
texts,  might  be  exclusively  to  the  "  Book 
of  Psalms,"  and  yet  the  injunction  not  be 
so.  But  I  have  shown  that  neither  the  re- 
ference nor  the  injunction  is  applicable  to 
the  Book  of  Psalms  alone. 

The  third  proof  text  is  a  part  of  the  His- 
tory of  Hezekiah's  restoration  of  the  ne- 
glected ceremonial  worship.  By  what  sort 
of  legerdemain  is  this  made  to  support  the 
exclusive  use  of  David's  psalms  in  the  New 
Testament  church  ?  This  interpretation  of 
Scripture  transmutes  a  command  of  Heze- 
kiah  into  a  command  of  Jesus  Christ;  it 
makes  the  duty  of  the  Levites  our  duty ;  it 
converts  a  temporary  arrangement  into  a 
perpetual  statute  ;  a  legal  ceremony  into  a 
gospel  ordinance ;  it  adds  an  exclusive 
clause  not  found  in  the  text ;  and  it  applies 
the  whole,  thus  augmented  and  transmuted^ 
to  the  "  Book  of  Psalms,"  which  was  not 
made  into  a  book  for  near  two  hundred 
years  after  Hezekiah  was  dead. 

Is  the  Synod  wise  in  giving  the  world 
such  a  sample  of  their  hermeneutics  ?  Are 
they  consistent  when  they,  in  the  same 
breath,  deprecate  the  "  teaching  for  doctrine 
the  commandments  of  men?"  They  would 
have  to  go  far  and  search  diligently  before 
they  find  so  glaring  a  case  of  it  as  they 
themselves  exhibit,  in  giving  as  the  proof  of 


140  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

a  doctrine  and  a  term  of  communion,  the 
commandment  of  the  man  Hezekiah,  with 
whatever  additional  force  it  derives  from 
their  own  endorsement.  I  must  say,  and  I 
say  it  with  sorrow,  that  I  have  met  with  no 
such  case  of  the  assumption  of  authority,  by 
a  church  court,  to  impose  an  article  of  faith, 
without  even  the  slender  right  claimed  in 
the  church  of  Rome — the  right  of  Tradition. 
Why  the  command  of  Hezekiah  to  the 
Levites  is  not  half  so  good  proof  of 
the  " exclusive"  doctrine,  as  I  can  bring 
from  the  Scriptures  for  singing  exclusively 
the  Book  of  Lamentations.  "And  Jeremi- 
ah lamented  for  Josiah  :  and  all  the  singing 
men  and  singing  women  spake  of  Josiah  in 
their  lamentations  to  this  day,  and  made 
them  an  ordinance  in  Israel :  and  behold, 
they  are  written  in  the  lamentations." — 2 
Chron.  xxxv,  25.  Here  is  an  "ordinance;" 
observed  perpetually,  "to  this  day;"  and  a 
plain  reference  to  the  written  Book — the 
"Lamentations."  This  was  one  hundred 
and  sixteen  years  after  Hezekiah  had  given 
his  command  to  the  Levites :  so  that  Jere- 
miah and  the  singers  of  his  time  did  not 
confine  themselves  "exclusively"  to  the 
Book  of  Psalms,  which  was  not  yet  made, 
nor  to  the  words  of  David  and  Asaph.  If 
the  words  of  Hezekiah  established  a  divine 
and  permanent  ordinance,  Jeremiah,,  a  great 


ON   PSALMODY.  141 

prophet,  would  certainly  have  observed  it. 
But  he  did  no  such  thing. 

Now,  in  conclusion  of  this  essay,  which  I 
have  condensed  into  the  very  smallest  com- 
pass, I  respectfully  express  the  hope,  that 
my  effort  for  peace  will  be  furthered  by  those 
who  read  this  little  work.  I  have  said  no- 
thing in  it,  I  trust,  that  is  inconsistent  with 
my  avowed  and  real  design,  nothing  severe, 
unmannerly  or  detractive  towards  my  former 
ecclesiastical  associates,  whom  I  still  am 
happy  to  reckon  as  my  personal  friends  and 
christian  brethren.  In  the  use  of  argument 
and  in  the  statement  of  facts,  alone,  have 
I  been  uncompromising,  aad  surely  they 
would  not  wish  me  to  be  lenient  in  this.  I 
have  aimed,  by  fair  reasoning,  from  Scripture 
and  history,  to  "conquer  a  peace."  Peace 
comports  best  with  my  own  disposition,  with 
the  spirit  and  mission  of  the  church  to  which 
I  belong,  and,  above  all,  with  the  character 
and  commands  of  the  Prince  whom  we  serve. 
When  I  think  how  the  cause  of  Christ  has 
been  retarded  and  cheated  of  its  triumphs 
by  this  ill-omened  controversy ;  how  neigh- 
borhoods have  been,  for  years,  left  destitute 
of  gospel  ordinances ;  how  shame  has  often 
covered  the  cheek  of  piety  with  blushes,  as 
infidels  and  errorists  have  pointed  the  finger 
of  scorn  at  our  domestic  battle-fields;  and 
when   I    consider,    how    ministerial    labor 


142  A  PLEA  FOR  PEACE 

might  be  saved;  how  missionary  progress 
might  be  accelerated;  how  mutual  love  and 
unity  might  testify  to  the  honor  of  Jesus 
Christ  before  a  skeptical  world;  and  how  the 
energy  that  has  been  squandered  on  inter- 
ecclesiastical  strifes  might  be  turned,  in  its 
combined  and  augmented  power,  on  the  cause 
of  evangelization,  at  home  and  abroad ;  I  ask 
with  a  throbbing  heart  and  trembling  voice, 
will  the  enemies  of  the  Lord  never  cease  to 
have  occasions  of  contemptuous  triumph? 
Will  the  real  and  concurrent  friends  of  the 
Prince  op  Peace  never  be  allowed  to  gather 
with  unanimous  affection  around  his  table . 
and  beneath  his  banner  of  love? 


